F 
73 
.6 1 



a7^75i 



p ^ 




Class .X-v-i 



Book_^]Bz5 



\ 



\ V ^J J 



[Document 47 — 1879.] 



CITY OF 




BOSTON. 



A SKETCH 



ORIGIN AND HISTORY 



GRANARY BURIAL-GROUND. 



In Common Council, March, 1879. 

Referred to the Special Committee ou Interments, with 
authority to print the same. 
Sent up for concurrence. 

W. H. WHITMORE, 

President. 



Concurred. 



In Board of Aldermen, March 31, 1879. 

HUGH O'BRIEN, 

Chairman. 



THE GRANARY BURYING-GROUND. 



It may be said primarily that in the Description of Boston, 
by our late Mayor Shurtleff, much iiifornifition concerning 
all the burial-grounds will be found. Although rather gen- 
eral in terms, the account there given seems to be correct; 
and it will be sufficient to say that the statements therein 
have been used in the following report. 

In regard to the Granary yard it may be briefly stated 
that it came into use some thirty or forty years after the 
settlement of the town. ProbaI)ly there was at first little 
order or precision to its boundaries, as it was simply a 



^73 

2 City Document No. 47. ' ^ ■ ' ■'' 

comer of the Common ■which reached westerly from tlie foot 
of Beacon and Cotton hills. Prior to 1700 we must regard 
the present Tremont street as little more than a Lme skirting 
the open connnon field, having houses on the easterly side 
only, and with the present Beacon street reaching up the 
hillside. It is not known when or where the first inter- 
ments were made, but from analogy we may presume they 
were nearest the road, and hence where the Tremont House 
slands. In Bonner's map of 1722 it appears as if the land 
nearest Beacon street had been by that time set otf for house- 
hits, about on the lines still so occupied ; but as yet our 
I'ark street could have been nothing more than a road-way. 
The town about this time seems to have placed its buildings 
on this land, and the Almshouse in fact was rebuilt about 
1682, on Beacon street, near Bark. About 1712 a Iiride- 
Avell, or House of Correction, Avas placed on the upper part 
of Park street; in 1738 a Workhouse one hundred and 
twenty feet long was added, and a Pound. Soon after, a 
Granary was put on the corner of Park and Tremont streets, 
while the Town bulls were kept in a corner of the main 
ground. 

From the words used in the records it seems that the town 
voted in 1719-20 to enlarge the ground on the Common 
side ; and, as will be seen, tombs were placed along that line. 
It is highly prol)able that some graves were extencled l)eyoud 
the line, since it will be remem])ered that when the drinking- 
fountain was placed on the Common near the Park street 
gate, and large excavations were made for the water-pipes, 
several gravestones were disinterred. 

At all events the records show that in 1721 fifteen tom])s 
were licensed on the west side of the yard, beginning at the 
upper corner, and being in a line parallel Avith the present 
I'ark street. By the end of 1725 the whole line was com- 
l)lete, and in 172() tombs Avere put on a new range from 
that corner, foUowinii Tremont street. 

B}' 1737 this row was also finished, and the corner turned 
irreguhirly round the garden lot now belonging to the 
Tremont House estate ; toml) No. 80 being the end one in 
that direction. 

Jn 1739 five more tombs were built, Xos. 81-85, being the 
first. on the easterly side, parallel with the passage-way from 
Tremont street to Tremont place. 

After this date less care seems to be taken with the record 
of grants ; if, indeed, any tombs were Iniilt for many years. 
Shurtleff indeed says that none were granted until 1810, and 
so far corroborates our ojiinion based on the hu-k of records. 

According to Shurtleff, 2<) tombs were built in 1810, 



History of Granary Burial-G round. 3 

being Nos. 86-111, forming all of the row in that direction, 
up to the line of the Athenreum estate. 

A line was also built on a portion of the north side of the 
yard, parallel to the estates adjoining the Athena3uni towards 
Park street. 

In 1807, also, William Payne and his sisters, who owned 
the estates on Beacon street west of the Athenreum, and 
abutting on the burying-ground, obtained leave to construct 
tombs in their yards, to be entered from the cemetery. Nine 
tombs were so built, under the stables and outhouses of 
these estates ; and yet these tombs were readily taken by 
such citizens as David Sears, Uriah Cotting, John Gore, 
Edward Blake, and others of note. 

There are also various tombs in the yard not placed by 
regular plan, and probably not the subject of regular grant. 
Such tombs, raised above ground and covered with a huge 
slab, are to be found in all of our older cemeteries, and 
usually belonged to the clergymen or magnates of the day. 
Thus we know that tomb No. 140 was that of Rev. John 
Baily, who died in 1697 ; and we find mention of tombs of 
Gov. Endicott, Simeon Stoddard, and Josiah Willard, — 
all prominent inhabitants of the town. 

The records indeed are very imperfect, and our main reli- 
ance must be the memorandum which has been kept in the 
various departments which have successively had the custody 
of the yard. The list herewith printed was originally pre- 
pared about a century ago, and from time to time various 
transfers and claims have been added. In 1818 the then 
Superintendent of Health, Samuel H. Hewes, opened a 
record-book, still preserved at the office of the Board of 
Health ; l)ut it was very fragmentary, and little used after the 
beginning. 

In regard to the question of the present ownership of the 
various tombs not much can be said. There seems to be no 
law or decision covering the point of wherein the ownership 
rests on the death of the first constructor of a tomb. 

No case seems to have arisen as to the rights of heirs. Of 
course a tomb is of but very limited capacity, and when 
once filled, common propriety would restrain any heir from 
insisting upon an abstract right to place bodies in the ances-- 
tral vault. But where no disposition has been made by gift, 
and where descendants are numerous, there may well be a 
question as to the rights of the heirs. The town of Boston 
seems to have had a by-law that when tombs became dilapi- 
dated it might repair the same and assign them to other 
parties. It seems that this was done, after the Revolution 
especially, when the families of former owners had departed 



4 City Document No. 47. 

from the coiintiy. But to-day the question will arise whether 
the riii'lit to sell a toinb depends upon the consent of all of 
the descendants" of the grantee of one hundred and fifty 
years ago. Undou])tedly for the present purpose it will be 
sufficient to point out one owner, but a search for title will 
be long and inconclusive. 

Extracts from the Records of the Selectmen. 

r. \U-r>, April 13, 1721. Vo/ed, That whereas the Town of Boston 
at a rul)liUe Town Meetino; on the 2!»lh (hiy of Aprill 1719 ordered that 
th(! .South Burvin*^ place .should be hilar<j:ed next the Common or Train- 
ing Fitdd : In'pursuance of which vote or ordtjr the selectmen in the 
year 172U did so Inlarge the said Burying-Blace, at which time sundry 
of the Inhalntants of the said Town to the number of fifteen desired 
liberty to erect new Tombs, on the soutii line of the said Burying- 
])lace, which the Select men granted on condition they would carry up 
and maintain a brick wall on said line at the end of their Toinl)s which 
said line of Tombs begins at the upper or west corner of the said Bury- 
ino'-Place next the Alms House, and are by the said Select men assigned 
to tlie several Persons who built the same as follows, viz. : — 

To Jonathan Belclier, Esq., the upper tomb whicli we call . 

" Oliver Noyce, Esq., downward 

" Mv. Jami's Gooch ........ 

" Mr. Thomas Cushin 

" Capt. Tliomas Steel 

" Mr. James Bowdoiii 

" Mr. William I"oy 

" Mr. (Jeorge Betiiune 

" i\lr. Ezekiel Eewis 

" Mv. Koijert (iut(;ridge . 

" Mr. William Webster, his heirs 

" Jeram Allen, Esq 

*' ^Villiam Harris, Esq. 

" Capt. Adino liulfmch 

" Mr. Joshua llenshaw No. li> 

Ordered, That the above written be entred by the Town Clei-k in the 
Select men's book, and Certificates be by him given out to tlie Owners 
in the form following, viz. : — 

" At a meeting of tlie Select men of Boston, Aprill the loth, 1721. 

" 'J'liere is granted to Jona Belcher, Esq., the lirst loml) from tlie west 
end of the sTnilli Burying Place, on the south line of said Burying 
Place, he having at hi.s own charge erect(!d the same and i)aid to the 
Town' Jiis part c)I' the Common shore for draining the said tombs, — and 
60 tlie rest." 

P. IS.-), 1721, March 5. Upon a petition of Mr. John Edwards ot Bos- 
ton, shewcth. tliat whereas tiiere is a Tomb in the South Burying place, 
belonging to the Late (iovcrnour Endieot, wliich has bin unimproved for 
niany'^vears, and there being no family in said Town nearer related to 
the sai'd (iovernour EndicotVs family than iiis, desires he may liave liberty 
granted him to make use of it for ids family, (iranted that tlie said 
John Edwards has Liberty to Improve the said Tomb until a person of 
better right to it api)ears to Claim it. 

1722, April 17, (p. 187), grants were made as follows: — To 

Gill No. IG, David Colson No. 17, Thomas Crees No. 18, Henry (;■"" 



No. 


1 


No. 


2 


No. 


3 


No. 


4 


No. 


5 


No. 


6 


No. 


7 


No. 


8 


No. 


9 


No. 


10 


No. 


11 


No. 


12 


No. 


13 


No. 


14 



UIO- 



IIiSTOUY OF Gkanaky Burial-Gkound. 5 

neaues jSTo. 19. " Granted to each of them their respective tombs, the}' 
having erected them at their own expense and paid to the Town their 
share to the common shore." 

1722, Sept. 24, (p. 207.) " Liberty granted for a tomb to be built 
for Mr. Jolin Cone}', dec'*, in the S. Bur3'ing place on the south line 
No. 20." Liberty granted to Samuel Barrett to build a tomb on the 
same line, No. 21. 

1723, Oct. 11, (p. 244.) Liberty granted etc. "upon terms of the for- 
mer grants," to Jonas Clark No. 22, Jonathan Jackson No. 23. 

1723, Nov. 25, (j). 246.) " There is granted to J\Ir. William Downes 
the twenty-fourth Toomb from the west end of the South Burying place 
on the south line of the said burying place, he having at his own charge 
erected the same and paid to the Town his part of the co.mmon shore 
for draining the said Toombs." 

1724, xVpril 27, (p. 256-7.) " Liberty is granted to Mr. Samuel Rand 
to build a Tomb in the South Burying jjlace on the south line, No. 25, 
upon the same conditions others had." 

" Liberty is also granted to Mr. Silence Allen and Mr. Eliazer Darby 
to build two Tombs between them on the same conditions, No. 27 
and 28." 

"Libert}' is also granted to David Demming, Henry Ilowel, and 
Hannah Demming to build one Toomb between them on the same con- 
ditions. No. 29." 

(P. 258.) " Liberty is granted- to Mr. Thomas Wallis to build a 
Toomb in the South Burying Place on the south line, No, 29, upon the 
same conditions others had." 

" Liberty is also granted to Mr. William Palfrey to erect a Toomb in 
the same Burying place on the same terms. He quitt his Grant to Capt. 
Bonner." 

1724, July 17, (p. 266.) "Liberty granted to Mr. Andrew Faneuil 
to ei'ect a Toomb in the South Bui-ying place, near to the Toomb of 
Simion Stoddard, Esq." i^ 

1725, Sept. 27, (p. 311.) Liberty granted &c., "upon the same con- 
ditions others did " to Cap't. John Bonner No. 30, William Spiekman, 
No. 31, Plenry Gibbins No. 32, Jera Belknap No. .33, Penn Townsend, 
No. 34. 

(P. 312.) "Liberty is granted to Mr. Thomas Wallis to build a 
Toomb in the South Burying place upon the south line No. (26) upon 
the same terms as others had granted. Liberty being formerly granted 
to Mr. Eleazer Darby and Silence Allen to build a Tomb betwixt them, 
have now made application they may have each of them a toomb ; which 
was granted. To Mr. Eliazer Darby No. (27), to Mr. Silence Allen 
No. (28.) 

1726, Sept. 6. (p. 348.) Liberty is granted to build a toml) in the 
south burying place, on the new line, " on the same conditions formerly 
granted to others," to John Borland, No. 37; Joseph Brandon, No. 38; 
Barrett Dyer, No. 39 ; John Durant, No. 35. 

1726, Nov. 19, (p. 350.) Liberty &c., " upon the conditions as others 
have the liljerty " to Nathanial Cunningham, No. 40. 

1726-7, March 10, (p. 358.) Liberty, &c., "on the same terms as 
others, having paid part of the drain" to Wm. Bowen, No. 34 ; Thomas 
Downe, No. 44. 

1727, May 3, (p. 363.) Liberty, &c., " upon the west line on the 
same terms as others had, he having paid for the benefit of the drain," 
to Capt. Cyprian Southick, No. 46. 

1727, May 29, (p. 365.) J>iberty &c., "on the same conditions the 
former persons did, he having paid for the drain" to John Jekyl, No. 
47; John and Thomas Hill, No. 45; Ann Green, No. 41; AVilliam 
Wheelwright, No. 42. 

1727, Aug. 28, (p. 376.) Liberty granted, &c., " on same terms 



City DocmiENT No. 47. 

■with others" to Joliii Hunt, No. 49 ; Jolin Dolbear, Xo. 51 ; Francis 
Warden, Xo. 5;3. 

17:^7, Sep't. 8, (p. 377.) Liberty granted &c., "on former terms," to 
James Pemberton, Xo. 48 ; Cap't. John Fairweather, No. 43; William 
Youn^, glazier, Xo. 52; Nathaniel l')yiie!d, Xo. 50. 

1727-8. ]\Iareli 25, (p. 888.) Liberty jifranted of a toml) on the east 
line " on the eonditions "granted to others " to Robert Patteshall, and to 
Capt. William Blare. [Xo numbers given.] 

At the end of the volume of Soloctmeii's Records from 1715 
to 1729, and in the same handwriting, is the foHowing: — 

".4 LiHof the Toombfi in the South Bunjing i^lcice on the Soii/h Line 
and numbered, viz. : — 



Jonatlian Belcher, esq. . . . Xo. 1 

Oliver Xoyes, esq. ..... 2 

Capt. James (loueh ..... 3 

I\Ir. Thomas Ciishing ..... 4 

Capt. Thomas Steel ..... 5 

i\Ir. James Bowdoin ..... 6 

]Mr. William Foy 7 

]\Ir. (ieorge Betiume ..... 8 
]\Ir. Ezekiel l^cwis ... .9 

JNIr. Robert (iiiteridge .... 10 

Mr. William Webster . . . . 11 

Jeramiah Allen, esq. . . . . . 12 

William Harris, esq V.\ 

Capt. Adino Bnlfinch ..... 14 

]\Ir. Joshua Henshaw ..... 15 

]\Ir. Jolin (iill 16 

(.Vow 'J'liiinias n.incock) aihldl in (liffcrent ink. 

jNIr. David Colson 17 

Doc'' Thomas Creese ..... 18 

]\Ir. Heiuy (ieneue ..... 19 

Mr. John Coney 20 

My. Samuel Harrett 21 

Mr. Jonas Clark 22 

Mr. .Jonathan .laekson .... 23 

]\Ir. William Downs (pinmaker) . . 24 

Mr. Samuel Rand 25 

Mv. Tliomas Wallis 26 

Capt. Eliezer Darby ..... 27 

]Mr. Silence Allen ..... 28 

Mr. David Deming 29 

Capt. ,Iohii Bonner ..... 30 

IMr. William Spikeman .... 31 

Mv. Henry (iihhons 32 

i\Ir. Jeremiali IJelknap .... 33 

]\Ir. William Bowen 34 

ISIr. John Durant ..... 35 

Penn Townsend, esq. ..... 31) 

]\Ir. Jolui Borland ..... 37 

IMr. -Joseph Brandon ..... 38 

My. Barret Dyer 39 

Mr. Xathanicl Cunningham ... 40 

Mrs. Ann (ireen . . . . . . 41 

My. William Wheeler, jun^ Capt. W" Blak 42 



History of Granary Burial-Ground. 7 

Capt. John Fairwether .... 43 

Mr. Thomas Down 44 

Messrs. John &Tliomas Hill ... 45 

Capt. Cyprian Southack .... 46 

John Jekiel, esq. 47 

Mr. James Femberton .... 48 

Mr. John Hunt 49 

jSTathaniel Bytield, esq ^O 

Mr. John Dolbeare 51 

Mv. William Young 52 

Mrs. Frances Wardwcll .... 53 

Mr. William Lee 54 

Mr. John Wendell 55 

Major Paul Mascareen .... 56 

Mr. Thomas Jackson .... 57 

Mr. Andrew Tylor 58 

Mr. Francis Gatcom . • . • • • 59 

Mr. Nicholas Buttolph .... 60 

AVilliam Welsteed, esq. his family . . 61 

Doc. Nathan' Williams .... 62 

Mr. William AVheelerjun^ . •. . 63 

INIr. William Talphree .... 64 

Messrs. Zeeha & Cornelius Thaver . . 65 

Mr. Robert Fattishall . \ . . 66 

Capt. James Blin 67 

1729, Aug. 6 (p. 5). "Granted to the several persons hereafter 
named, each a Toomb in the South Burying Place on the east line on 
the conditions on the former Persons. 

The Rev<i. Mr. William Welsted for his father's family. 

William PalTrie. 

Capt. James Blin. 

1729, Dec. 29 (p. 12). Granted &c. "on the same conditions that 
others had them granted on '' — to ]Mr. John Windal. 

Dec. 31 (p. 12). "Granted to Mr. William Lee liberty of a Toomb in 
the South Burying Place on the East line on the same condition with 
others," was granted July, 1728. 

1729-30, March 12, (p. 19.) " Granted to Mr. Thtmias Jackson, of 
Boston, merchant, one of the newtoombs in the South Burying place on 
the east line No. ( — ) on the same conditions with others." 

173o-6, Feb. 25, (p. 277.; " Liberty is granted to Mr. John Knee- 
land to break up the ground in the South Burying Place, between the 
Bull house and the north east corner of it, in order for the building five 
tombs, upon condition that he build a brick wall where the Fence now 
stands and make good the ground again to the satisfaction of the select- 
men." 

1735-6, March 3 (p. 280.) "Voted that Messrs. Joshua Blanchard, 
John Kneeland, Jr., Jonathan Williams, Jr., Benjamin Emmons and 
Thomas Hubbard shall have the tombs granted to be built in the South 
Burying place as entred the 25 Feb. last." 

1736, April 14 (p. 294.) " A petition signed by Messrs. Edm' 
Qnincy, Thomas Jackson, Josepli Green and sundry others, praying for 
liberty to erect a brick wall on the northerly side of the south "burying 
place,"^ with Tombs under the same, or that other provision may be 
made for their accommodation, viz., in the old burying place" was 
read and referred. 

1736, June 2 (p. 317.) " Mr. Joshua Thomson prays for liberty to 
build a tomb, or that he may have assigned to him one of those that are 
about to be built in the South burying place near the Bull-House, as it 
now stands, upon the conditions usual." 



8 City Document No. 47. 

P. 139. 1733, May 8. " Liberty is granted to Mr. John Lee to break 
up the f^round aiul "buikl a Tomb in the South Burying Place about 26 
I'ect distance Irom tlic South west wall against the Tomb belonging to 
"William Harris, Esq." 

New Vol. E. P. 07, 1736-7, Feb. 23. "John Jeffries, esq. informs 
that it is the desire ol" Mr. John Gibbins to have liberty to build a Tomb 
in the South Burying Place." 

E. pp. 84-5, 1736-7. INIarch 23. " Wlun-eas upon the petition of 
sundry })crsons as entred at several times Liberty was grant(;d for the 
erecting a Number of Tombs in the South Burying Place, which work 
being comjdeated and finished the Tombs allotted and drawn and a list 
of them presented to us for confirmation : 

^'ott:i), tliat the Thirteen Tombs lately erected in the South Burying 
place, numbered from sixty-eight to eighty inclusive, be and hereby are 
granted and confirmed unto the I'crsons hereafter named, their llcirs 
and assigns respectively, forever, viz : — 

• 

No. 68 ]\Ir. Pvichard Checkley. 

69 ]\Ir. Jonathan Williams, jun^ 

70 Mv. Thomas Hubbard. 

71 . . .* . . Mr. Benjamin Emmons. 

72 INIr. John Indieott. 

73 . . . . . Mr. .Joshua lilanchard. 

74 . . . . . i\Ir. Edward (iray. 

75 . . . . . The Hon. John O.sborne, Esq. 

76 . . . . . Mr. Edmund Qnincy. 

77 . . . . . Mr. Thomas Jackson. 
78 ]\Ir. Isaac Walker. 

71) Mr. John Buttolph. 

80 . . . . . Mr. Joseph (ireen. 

I'pon the following conditions, viz. : That they and each of them, 
their Heirs and assigns, Do from time to time forever hereafter at their 
own j)roper costs anil charges, uphold, maintain and keep in good re])air 
the Brick Wall or Fence, with Cants on the Top of the same, as it is 
now built, and of the full breadth of each of their respective Tombs, to 
tiie satisfaction of the Selectmen of the town for the time being, — 
Paying each his pro2)ortion for the benefit of tlie Drain as has been Cus- 
tomary. 

E. P. 109, 1737, Apl. 25. Mr. John Clough (Leatlier-dresser) prays 
for Liberty to build a Tomb in the South Burying palce next adjoining 
to the Tomb number 80 latelj' erected there. 

E. P. 298, 1738, A])ril 5. " Capt. Jonathan Armitage desired Liberty 
to erect a Tomb in the South Burying place; on the north line. His 
former desii'c made in the year 1734 bi'ing omitted cntring at time.'" 

P. 328, 1738, June 21. Deacon Parker and 'Slv. Pihuichard desired 
leave to build four new tombs in the South l>urying place adjoining the 
thirteen built in 1736 on the northerly siile of tlie yard, and it was 
granted, the tombs " to be disjwsed of by the Selectmen as tliey shall 
see fit."' 

F. p. 6, 1738, Sept. 13. As all the money for Tombs 68 to 80 had not 
been paid in, Mr. Joshua Blancliard was ordered to collect it and pay 
for " building a small i)iecc of Brick wall at the North corner of said 
P>urying place, against which part of Mr. Joseph Green's Tomb stands, 
viz. : Number 80." 

F. p. 63, 1738-9, Jany 10. Voted that the five Tombs lately l)ui]t in 
the South burying place number'd from 81 to 85 inclusive, be and 
hereby are granted to the persons hereafter named, their Heirs and 
assigns forever, viz. : 



History of Gkanary Burial-G round. 9 

No. 81 . . . .to Deacon Jacob Parker. 

82 . . . . " Deacon John Clougli. 

83 . . . . " the heirs of Sam' (irecnleaf, deed. 

84 . . . . " Capt. Jonathan Armitage. 

85 . ... . " Doctor John Gibbhis. 

Upon tlie conditions following, viz. : that they and each of them, 
their Heirs and assigns. Do from time to time forever heriiafter, at their 
own proper cost and charge uphold, maintain and keep in good repair 
the Brick \Vall or Fence, with Cants on the Top of the same, as it is now 
built, and of the full breadth of each of their respective Toml)S, to the 
satisfaction of tiie Selectmen of the Town for the time being, l>aying each 
his proportion for the Benefit of tiie Drain as has been customary. 

F. p. 334, 1740, July 16. Liberty to Ilu^h Hall, Esq., to "build a 
Tomb in the South burying place "and to bring in his bricks &c., by 
the almshouse," " provided that he takes care for putting up the Fence 
a<rain in ffood order." 



RECORDS OF THE TOWN OF BOSTON, 
Vol. 8, P. 491. 

At a meeting of the freeholders &c., Nov. 2, 1795. "The Article in 
the Warrant relative to the Common and Chajiel Burying grounds, read, : 
— Whereupon, voted that the Hon. Thomas Dawes, Esq., the Hon. George 
R. ]\Iinot, Esq., Dr. Eustis, Nath'l Apjjleton, Esq., Dr. Jarvis, 3Ir. 
Nath'l Balch, Hon. Wm. Tudor, Esq. be a committee. 

1795, Nov. 6, (p. 493.) The Committee appointed by the Town to 
consider the sv^bject of the Burying grounds at large and to report on 
Friday next some suitable 2)lace of deposit for the Dead, in order that 
the Town may be enabled to discontinue the opening of Graves in the 
Common and Chappel Burying grounds, report as follows : — 

The Committee having consulted the Physicians of the Town, find it 
to be their opinion that the Health of the Inhabitants is in danger from 
the crowded state of these Grounds, and the exhalations which must 
frequently ai'ise from opening Graves therein. In addition to which 
they find it is almost impossible to open new Graves, without disturb- 
ing tlie relicts of the Dead already interred. From an equal regard to 
Health, for a decent respect for both the living and the Dead, they rec- 
ommend to the Inhabitants to adojit the following measures : — 

1st. That no Graves or new Tombs shall be opened or built in either 
the Common or Chappel bui'ying Ground, after the first day of May 
next. 

2d. As the South Burying ground is already sufficiently large for 
the preseat accommodation of the Inliabitants and will admit of such 
enlargement, that the Selectmen be empowered to allot to any Inhabi- 
tant who may apply for the same, sut^cient Ground for erecting a 
TSmb in the Ground, and to enlarge the said South Burying Ground in 
a direction westerly whenever tiie publick convenience shall in their 
judgment require it. 

3d. Inasmuch as in remarkably inclemant weather it may be in- 
GOPvenient for Funerals to proceed to the South Burying Ground, that 
the Selectmen cause to be erected uniler the Vestry room of the Stone 
Chappel, or in some other part of the Chappel burying ground, a Vault 
or Tomb suitable for a temporary deposit, in which any of the Inhabi- 
tants who may incline thereto, shall have a right to deposit the Bodies 
of their deceased Friends or relatives, for a term of time not exceeding 
twenty-four hours (unless in particular cases) by permission of the 



10 City Document Xo. 47. 

Selectmen, until it may bo convenient for them to remove such Bodies 
to the place of linal interment. 
All which is submitted. 

TIIOS. DAWES, i>r order. 

The foreo:()in,<^ report havino; been read and considered the question 
was put wlu'ther the same shall be accepted. 

Passed in the affirmative. 

1802, Jany. 25, (p. 92.) " :Mr. Bonjamin Hale and Asa Hatch apply 
that their names should [be] entred in' the plan of the Granary Burying 
Ground on Toml) Xo. 11. formerly owned bv Webster. Mr. Hale being 
the legal heir under Wel)ster, and having sold one half of said Tomb to 
Mr. Hatch." 

1807, June 24, (p. 346.) "Dr. James Llovd informed tlio Board 
that by consent of Mrs. Shrimpton Hutcliinson'he liad sohl the Tomb 
in the Granary Burying ground belonging to Mr. Hutchinson, to Dea- 
con Nye & son, and wished it to be so entered upon the Selectmen's l)ooks. 
Agreed that such communication should be entered on the Record.'" 

1807, Apr. 29, (p. 338.) "On the application of Christopher Gore, 
William Paine and Mr. Fletcher for lilx'rty to build a number of Tombs 
on their land adjoining on the west wall of the Granary burying ground 
with lil)erty to enter such tombs through the brick wall." Referred to 
a committee. 

1807, Aug. 6, (p. 353.) " A petition of Mr. ]\[ichael Homer having 
been several times before the Board, for liberty to build Tombs in the 
Granary burying ground, reference was had to the doings of the Town 
in the year 1795, when it appeared that the Town ordered tliat no new 
grave or tomb should be built in the Chapel or (iranary burying 
grounds; in consequence of this vote the Board determined that it" was 
not in their power to give liberty as requested." 

1807, Sept. IG, (p. 358.) On said application "Voted that they have 
the consent of tlie Board to their request, provided they shall obtain a 
like consent from the persons who own Tombs adjoining to that wall; 
which consent sliall be expressed in writing and signed by said propri- 
etors and put upon the Town files." 

1807, Sept. IC), (p. 358.) " Messrs Daniel and Ignatius Sargent hav- 
ing applied for a deed of a Toml) in the (ii-anary burying ground lately 
rebuilt by Mr. INIichael Homer, it was agreed that upon ^Ir. Sargent pay- 
ing $300 for said Tomb,"the Ciiairman should 1)0 authorized to give a cer- 
tificate as proposed by them ; and Mr. Homer to exhibit to the Board 
his account of expenses for allowance." 

" Voted, that in future, when any Tombs are gone to decay from the 
neglect of the owners or from the want of any proprietor tlicreto, that 
they shall be advertised in the public i)apers, for any one who has a 
legal claim to appearand make the necessary repairs ; and incase no 
such person is to be found, that the Board would emjjloy workmen to 
rebuild or repair the same, and sell tiiem for the advantajre of the 
iown." 

1810, Feb. 7, (p. 449.) M^An a])plication was road from Robt. T. 
Paine, Esq., stating his claim to a Tomb in the Granary burying ground 
formerly belonging to Josiah Willard, Ks(|., and in which tomb several 
of the ancestors of Judge Paine are now depositcMl, but which was taken 
possession of by .Mr. Sanuiel Bangs for repairs done thereon in 1781), by 
consent of the selectmen at that time. The IJoard considered the ap- 
plication and are of opinion that Judge Paine's claim is well founded, 
and are willing that he sliould take possession of the said Tomb, but 
that he should not ditsurb or remove the remains of any of the family 
of Mr. Bangs who may be therein." 

1810, M:ireh 19, Hoard of Health Records. It was reported inexpe- 
dient to adojjt the jjlan for building tombs in the Granarv. 



History of Granary Burial-Gkound. . 11 

May 7. Orders passed relating to graves and providing tliat " on 
application to this Board persons may be licensed to Ijuild Tombs, in 
the North, Chapel, Granary, Central, and Sontli burying-grounds, on 
condition the tombs be built under the direction of tlie Superintendent; 
that against each tomb the proprietor thereof shall erect a substantial 
brick \\ixU at least six feet high from the top of tlie arch of the tomb, 
and at thfi joint expense of all tiie proprietors shall sink good and 
sufficient stone or brick drains to carry off the water from the tombs." 

June 18, Report " that it will be well to reserve the North East line of 
Ground (Granary) for Tombs." 

July 23, Voted " that the subject of laying out a new range of Tombs 
in the Granary Burying ground be referred to the Superintending Com- 
mittee of the Ground." 

1810, July 30. Report of a Committee "that they have examined 
the said grounds and so far as respects the application of Mr. Sullivan, 
think it advisable to allow him to build on or enlarge a Tomb on the 
North westerly side of the Bellingham Tomb, he contributing to the 
expense of a wall on the AVest side of the Granary Ground, but that it 
will not be advisable to allow any new Tombs in the ground, except 
adjacent to the fences and on ground next to the Fence." 

Report accepted. 

August 6. Voted,*" that the Committee to procure Records of Tombs, 
&c., for the Selectmen, have further time." 



12 City Document No. 47. 



GRANARY BURIAL-GROUND. 



Office of the Boaud of Health, 

Boston, March G, 1879. 

To the City Council of Boston: — 

Gentlemen, — The Board of Health respectfully reports 
that the public health requires that .future iutennents in each 
and all of the tombs in the " Granary "•burial-ground be 
prohibited. Said tombs are numbered from one to two hun- 
dred and four inclusive. 

The names of the past and present owners, so far as we 
know, are hereto annexed. 

S. H. DURGIN, 

Cliairman. 



No. OF ToMn. Owners. 

2 Archil)ald, Azor G., part. 

12 Allen, Jeremiah (now George Allen) 

28 Allen, Sik^ice, p't. 

31 Andrews, Stephen S. 

35 Allardise, Ann, p't. 

38 Amory, Rebecca, p't. « 

38 Amory, Francis, p't. 

39 Adams, Capt. Thomas. 
42 Allery, Lydia, p"t. 

84 Armitage, Jeremiah, p't. 

106 Ashton, John, p't. 

117 Austin, Thon)as, claims p't. 

145 Allen, p't. 

155 Andrews, Stephen S. 

1(54 Adams, Hon. Isaac, p't. 

165 Atlams, Elijah. 

182 AUino, William, p't. 

1!)2 Armstrong, Samuel T., p't. 

196 Andrews, Stephen S., p't. 



History of Granary Burial-Ground. 13 

No. OF Tomb. Owners. 

3 Bean, Aaron, p't. 

6 BoAvdoin, James. 

1 Betluinc, George. 

14 Bulfinch, Adino, p't. 

14 Bulfinch, Samuel, p't. 

21 Barrett, Samuel, p't. 

21 Bates, John, p't. 

25 Belknap, p't. 

30 Bonner, John and Samuel. 

32 Baker, Letitia, p"t. 

33 Belknap, Jeremiah. 

34 Bowen, William, p't. 

37 Borland, John, 

38 Brandon, Joseph, p't. 

42 Blaie, William, p't. 

43 Bradbury, Charles, p't. 
49 By field, Nathaniel, p't. 
60 Buttolf, Nicholas, p't. 

62 Bradlee, Thomas and John, p't. 

63 Brigham, B., p't. 

• 67 Blinn, Capt. James, 1729, p't. 

67 Baldwin, Kev. Thomas, p't. 

72 Billings, Ebenezer, p't. 

73 Blanchard, Joshua. 

. 74 Bhike, Edward, p't. 

76 Bullard, Jabez, p't. 

79 Blake, George, p't. 

80 Breed, Rebecca, p't. 

81 Beighton, James, p't. 

82 Boylston, Nicholas, p't. 

85 Binney, Barnaba, p't. 

86 Babcock, Adam. 
92 Baxter, Daniel, p't. 

105 Blanchard, Jedediah, p't. 

108 Bradlee, Joseph P., p't. 

120 Bourne, iVlelatiah, p't. 
132 Blake, Edward. 
141 Bumstead. 

143 Bumstead, Thomas. 

144 Baury, Alfred L., p't. 
152. Bullard, J., p't 

159* Barton, J., p't. 
161 Brown, p't. 
173 Bangs, Samuel, p't. 
176 Baxter, John, p't. 
178 Barrett, Francis, p't. 



14 City Document No, 47. 

No. OF Tomb. Owners. 

181 Blake, George W., p't. 

184 Bass, Moses, p't. 

188 Bishop, R. C, p't. 

190 Brooks, John, p't. 

192 Bass, p't. 

194 Badger, John, p't. 

199 Bradford, Saimiel, p't. 

200 Boardinaii, Thomas and Willian) 
113 Baxter, Joseph, p't. 

202 Brown, Nancy, p't. 

4 Cnshing, Thomas. 

13 Chirk, Nathaniel. 

20 Coney, J. 

22 Clark, Jonas, p't. 

40 Cunningliam, Is^athaniel. 

38 Colman, William. 

671 Callender, II. B., p't. 

66 Chnly, Kichard. 

80 Clapp, William W. 

110 Coolidge, Cornelius. 

125 Cal)ot, George. 

128 Cumiingham, Andrew, p't. 

129 Coverly, Wells. 

135 Crackl)on, Lemuel, p't. 

1G6 Gushing, Charles. 

192 Clough^ p't. 

173 Cheeney, Samuel, p't. 

15 Dorr, Joseph H., p't. 
Dorr, Sanniel, p't. 

24 Downs, AVilliam and Decoster T. 

24 Diliawav, Samuel. 

27 Dorl)v,E. 

29 Dcmi^ng, David and II. 

32 Durivage, Ann. 

35 Din-ant, John. 

44 Down. 

47 'Dyer, John D., p't. 

50 Dolbear, John. 

53 Dolliver, Peter. 

72 Day. 

75 Dixwell. 

83 Davidson, Andrew C. 

89 Dalton, Peter K. 

97 Dexter, Jonathan jNI. 

109 Draper, Lorenzo. 

135 Davis, Isaac, p't. 



History of Granary Burial-Guound. 15 

No. OF Tomb. Owneus. 

1<)8 Dumer {ind Freeman, p't. 

182 Do2:<iett, Noah, p't. 

183 Date William, p't. 
186 Doiuiison, AVilliam. 
189 Derby, I., p"t. 

201 Dean, Thomas, p't. 

14 Emmons, Joishua, p't. 

18 Erving, Edward S., p't. 

95 Easte, Caleb. 

116 Evving, John and E. S. 

145 Eaton", p't. 

154 Eliot, Samuel. 4 

193 Ellis, David. 

194 Emerson, p't. 
163 Eckley, Joseph. 

71 Emmons, Benjamin. 

108 Emmons, Nathaniel, p't. 

134 Englesby, William T. 

22 Emmerson, Jonathan. 

7 Foy, William. 

. 35 Fiske, Mary, p't. 

43 Fairweather, John, p't. 

47 Ficker, John, p't. 

GQ Fan-is, William, p't. 

67 Flagg, David, p't. 

138 Fane'iiil, Peter, p't. 

167 Farmer, Jesse, p't. 

169 Foster, B. and W. 

174 Freeman, Nye and. 

177 Freeman, James, p't. 

177 Fitch, Jeremiah, p't. 

187 Freke, John, p't. 

195 Franklin. 

3 Gooch, John and William, p't. 

9 Gray, Abi<rail, p't. 

10 Gould, William, p't. 

16 Gill, p't. 

18 Greese, Dr. Thomas, p't. 

19 Gninea, Henr}^ p't. 
32 Gibbin, Henry, p"t. 

41 Green, Ann, Rufus, and Gardiner. 

59 Gatcomb, Francis, i)'t. 

59 Greenlief, Oliver, p't. 

69 Goddard, William, p't. 

74 Gray, p't. 

80 Green, Joseph, p't. 



16 City Document No. 47. 

No. OF Tomb. Owners. 

83 Grcenlief, Samuel, p't. 

87 Goodwin, Ozias, p't. 

124 Giiy, Martin. 

131 Gore, John. 

135 Gore, p't. 

135 Goodricli, Isaac W., p't. 

147 Griggs, Robert D. 

152 Guild, C., p't. 

158 Goddard, Jonathan, p't. 

170 Greenough, David. 
103 Grafton, p't. 

201 Grublj^ William. 

202 Gilbert, Samuel, p't. 
11 Hale, Benjamin, })"t. 
11 Hatch, Asa, p't. 

11 Hatch, Harrington, p't. 

13 Harris, William, p't. 

14 Hyde, Abigail, p't. 

15 Henshaw, Joshua, p't. 

16 Hancock, Thomas, })'t. 
45 Hill, Ann and Elizabeth. 
;>1 Hunt, John, p't. 

53 Huntington, Benjamin, p't. 

70 Hubbard, Thomas. 

72 Howe, Abraham, p't. 

97 Hanmiond, Samuel, })'t. 

98 Head, Joseph, Jr., p't. 

106 Homer, James and David, p't. 

107 Hawks, Joseph, p't. 
113 Hayden, William. 

115 Hichborn, Sanniel, p't. 

127 Ilammatt, John H. and Charles. 

144 Hall, Hugh, p't. 

158 Ilubbart, John, p't. 

171 Hill, James, i)t. 

176 Hayden, "William, p't. 

180 Hyslop, William, p't. 

191 Homer, Jacob, Michael and Eleazer, pt. 

185 Huntington, l\ali)h. 

190 Hooper, James, p"t. 

193 Hodgden, Benjamin, p't. 

194 Hunt, Mary, jh. 

196 Hutchinson, James, p't. 

197 Hinckley, Elizabeth and E., p't. 
197 Hooton, Mary, p't. 

203 Infants' Tomb. 



History of Granary Burial-Ground. 17 

No. OF Tomb. Owners. 

23 Jackson, Jonathan, p't. 

47 Jackson, John, p't. 

23 Jackson, Charles, pt. 

57 Jackson, Dr. Thomas P. 

67i Jackson, Thomas, p't. 

77 Jackson, Thomas, p't. 

81 Jackson, Anna, p't. 

,84 James and Pelham, p't. 

84 James, John W., p't. 

107 Jackson, Johnson, p't. 
120 Jenney, Stephen, p't. 
13G Jones, .Nancy, p't. 
138 Jones, Edward, p't. 
17.0 JetFrics, Dr. John. 

63 Kendall, Sewell, p't. 

7(5 Kettell, James, p't. 

9 Lewis, Ezekiel, [)'t. 

13 Lasenby, Josei)h, p't. 

21 Leach, Thomas, p't. 

28 Lamb, Rebecca and Abigail, p't. 

34 Lucas, John, p't. 

Leitner, George, p't. 

30 Lewis, p't. 

40 Longley, George, p't. 

46 Lepean, John, p't. 

51 Loring, John J., p't. 

49 Lyde, p't. 

54 Lee, William. 

60 Leverett and Phillips, p't. 

103 Lodge, Giles. 

108 Ludington, ( ?) p't. 
125 Lee, Joseph, p't. 

120 Lee, Jeremiah, p't. 

121 Lamb, James, p't. 
194 Lillie, John, ])'t. 
197 Lee, Deacon John. 

17 Mosely, Elizabeth M. 

19 Molineaux, John, p't. 

22 Minot, p't. 

44 Morrill, James, p't. 

56 Mazereen, Col. Paul, p't. 

671 Manley, William, p't. 

102 Mackay, Mungo. 

109 McClure, Thomas, p't. 
113 Munroe, William, p't. 

136 McClench, Nancy, heirs of, p't. 



18 City Document No, 4^ 

No. OF Tomb. Owxeks. 

13G jMotlcy, Maiy, p't. 

188 i\Iaguer, John, p't. 

2 IS' o yes, Oliver, p't. 

Gl Nickersoii, Eheiiezer, p't. 

174 Nye and Freeman. 

26 O'liver, Hubbard, p't. 

74 Oliver, Henry J., p't. , 

75 Osborne, John, p't. 

75 Otis, Harrison (iray, p't. 
91 Osl)orn, John. 

]G() Old South Chnrch. 

20 Prentice, William H. 

35 Peck, William I)., p't. 

o() Perkins, John S., })'t. 

39 Paine, William, ])'t. 

42 Phillips, John, p't. 

42 Perkins, jMary, p't. 

48 Pemberton, James, p't, 

34 Park-st. Chnrch, p't. 

56 Perkins, Thomas, i)'t. 

60 Phillips, Leverett and, ])'t. 

60 Phillips, Thomas W.. p't. 

64 l^Ufrey, William. 

i\6 Petershall, Ilobert. 

76 Parker, iM. S., p't. 

81 Parker, Jacob, p't. 

82 Priest, John F. 

84 Pelham, James and, p't. 

88 Paine, Robert T. 

105 Park, John, p't. 

115 Parker, Mrs., p't. 

117 Parker, Thomas, p't. 

118 Peck, Thomas, H., p't. 

122 Price, EzekieL 

123 Payne, William. 

118 Perkins, Thomas II., p't. 

145 Prince, p't. 

161 Partridge, p't. 

] (52 Philli[)s, Turner and James. 

164 Patterson, Enoch, p't. 

168 Powell, Duiner and, p't. 

168 Powell, William, p't. 

178 Phillips, Samuel, p't. 

184 Phillips, Sanuiel, heirs, p't. 

196 Payne, William, p't. 

10 Robinson, William, p't. 



History of Granary Burial-Ground. 19 

No. OF Tomb. Owners. 

25 Eand, Samuel, p't. 

27 Eohbiiis, Jonathan Dorby, p't. 

66 Roulstone, John, p't. 

68 Randall, Dr. John, p't. 
81 Rand, Isaac, p't. 

1)4 Richard, John, p't. 

95 Richardson, Asa, p't. 

V'G Reynolds, Edward and William. 

97 Richardson, John Drew, p't. 
100 Russell, Benjamin. 

105 Richardson, Luke, p't. 

121 Roberts, Mary, p't. 

134 Reany, William L., p't. 

137 Richardson, William. 

139 Ritchie, William, p't. 

139 Ritchie, Edward S. 

172 Revere, Paul. 

173 Ray, Daniel, p't. 
187 Russell, Joseph, p't. 
198 Redman and Pao^e, p't. 
198 Roulstone, Michael, p't. 

1 Smith, Franklin. 

78 Smith, Franklin. 

107 Smith, Franklin. 

119 Smith, Franklin. 

133 Smith, Franklin. 

15f) Smith, Franklin. 

171 Smith, Franklin. 

5 Steel, Thomas. 

35 Strong, Abraham, p't. 

39 Staples, p't. 

44 Stimson, p't. 

46 Southac, Capt. Cyprian, p't. 

46 Southac, Francis, p't. 

47 Sweetser, John, p't. 
52 Sutton, p't. 

69 Shedd, Joseph and Sanmel A., [)'t. 

48 Sears, David, p't. 
65 Sumner, James. 

75 Sargent, Epes, p't. 

77 Stackpole, William, p't. 

84 Straw, John A., p't. 

85 Still man, Sanmel, p't. 
92 Stedman, Josiah, p't. 

98 Smith, Samuel, p't. 

99 Sumner, Thomas W. 



20 "City Document Xo. 47. 

No. OF Tomb. Owners. 

101 Snow, Gideon. 

112 Spooncr, Dr. William, p't. 

114 Snelling, Samuel. 

117 Stimpsoii, Isaac P., p't. 

142 Smith, Margaret, p't. 

140 Sullivan, James. 

148 Stevens, Isaac. 

158 Sunmer, Thomas W., i)'t. 

180 Sumner, Genl. 

183 Shattuck, William, p't. 

193 Stackpole, p't. 

Symmes, Thomas. 

36 Townsend, Penn, p't. 

52 Tuckerman, A., p't. 
55 ToAvnsend, Dr., p't. 
58 Tyler, Andrew, p't. 
61 Train, Samuel, p't. 

63 Thayer, Zachariah and Cornelius, p't. 

65 Thayer, Z. and C, 1729. 

90 Tucker, Richard D. 

93 Tilden, Joseph. 

105 Tolman, Henry, p't. 

109 Tufts, Francis, p't. 

Ill Trask, Francis, p't. 

126 Tileston, Thomas, p't. 

108 Tilden, p't. 

130 Thoriidike, Israel, p't. 

134 Torrey, Ebenezer, p't. 

142 Thaxter, Seth, p't. 

149 Taylor, William. 

150 Tidd, Jacob. 
167 Trull, Ezra, p't. 

189 Townes, William, p't. 

191 Torrey, Sanuiel. « 

192 Torrey, p't. 

67 Vezie, Joseph, p't. 

10 Walker, Edward B., p't. 

11 Webster, William, p't. 
21- Webl), Nathan, p't. 

26 Wallace, Thomas, p't. 

42 Wheeler, p't. 

44 Whitwell, Samuel, p't. 

53 Warden, Francis, p't. 
55 Wendell, John, p't. 

58 Wheelwright, George, p't. 

59 Welsh, Francis, p't. 



History of Granary Burial-Ground. 21 

No. OF Tomb. Owners. 

61 Welstead, William, p't. 

61 Welsh, Jonas, p't. 

62 Williams, Nathaniel, p't. 
65 Wheeler, William, p't. 

68 Wells, Samuel A., p't. 

69 Williams, Jonathan. 

79 Welland, Capt. John, p't. 

94 Wells, Titus, pt. 

104 White, Ebenezer. 

Ill Wright, ObadiMh, p't. 

140 Willis, Abigail and Charles. 

144 Welch, William, p't. 

145 Wells, p't. 

151 White, Isaac. 

152 Willett, J. 

153 Williams, John F. and Robert. 
157 Walley, Thomas. 

179 Whitwell, Benjamin and William. 

199 Williams, Jonathan, p't. 

52 Young, p't. 



CITY OF BOSTON. 

April 12, 1879. 
• Agreeably to the provisions of Chapter 182 of the Acts of 
1877, notice is hereby given to the owners of the tombs, 
described in the foregoing report of the Board of Health, to 
appear before the special committee of the City Council, 
appointed for that purpose, on Tuesday, the fifleenth day of 
July next, at 3 o'clock, P.M., at the City Hall. Boston, and 
show cause, if any they have, why each and all of said 
tombs in the Granary Burial-Ground should not be closed 
against any future interment therein. 

S. F. McCLEAKY, 

City Clerk. 



[Document 96 — 1879.] 



CITY OF t^« BOSTON. 




REPORT 



JOINT SPECIAL COMMITTEE 



INTRAMURAL INTERMENTS. 



In Common Council, September 25, 1879. 

The Joint Special Committee to whom was referred the 
communications from the Board of Health, recommending 
that further interments in the tombs in King's Chapel and 
Granary Burying-grouuds be prohibited, beg leave to submit 
the following report : — 

Agreeably to the provisions of Chapter 182 of the Acts of 
1877,^ notice was given to the owners of tombs in the above 
burying-grounds to appear before the committee at a time 
specified, and show cause why each and all of said tombs 
should not be closed. 

The hearing relating to the Granary Burying-ground was 
given on the 15th of July last, and, at the request of the 
proprietors of tombs, a second hearing was given on the 31st 
of July. 

The hearing concerning the King's Chapel Burying-ground 
was given on the 22d of July, and was adjourned to the 4th 
of September. 

An absti-act of the evidence and arguments presented at 
these hearings will be found in the Appendix. 

The question of prohibiting interments withiu the limits 

1 See page 61. 



2 City Document No. 96. 

of the city has been considered by previous City Councils, 
and the agitjition of the subject, a8 well as a growing sense 
of the impolicy of permitting such a flagrant violation of 
sanitary laws, materially aided the establishment of the rural 
cemeteries which now ornament our 8ul)url)s. 

The subjt^ct has received considerable attention in other 
cities of this and of foreign countriea, and has resulted in a 
large amount of legislation. 

i^clioving that a summary of what has been done in past 
years may be of interest at this time, the committee present 
a brief sketch of the history of intramural interments, com- 
piled from such sources of information as are available. 

The titles of authors quoted are given as far as known, 
and, for the convenience of those who may desire to consult 
the originals, the shelf and number of the book in the Bos- 
ton Public Library are added. 

The principal methods of disposing of the dead from time 
immemorial have been : — 

1. Interment, or the Inirial of the body in earth or 
stone. 

2. Incineration, or the burning of the body and subse- 
quent entombment of the ashes. 

3. Mummification, or the embalming of the body. 

The origin of each method is enveloped in the mists of 
antiquity. 

If we accept the theory of the pre-historic origin of man 
and his gradual development, we may suppose that in his 
orginal savage state he had little concern in the disposition 
of the remains of his kindred. They may have been left 
where they died, without attention, or they may have been 
devoured by the survivors, in which latter case, as Dr. 
Adams wittily remarks in his article on cremation and 
burial,^ alluding to our pre-Adamite progenitors, "the pros- 
pect of funeral baked nieats must have filled their minds 
Avith unhallowed joy." It is probable, however, that when 
man became sufficiently developed to be sensible of any feel- 
in<^ of respect or veneration for the remains of his kindred, 
inhumation was adopted, and became the general, although 
not tlic universal, custom of disposing of the dead. It is 
certainly the oldest method of Avhich we have any record. 

The Babylonians, Assyrians, Carthaginians, and other 
great nations of antiquity, buried their dead, and it is 
believed they did so in consequence of a tradition common 
amon<r them that the first man was buried.^ The Hebrews 

o 

» Cremation and Burial, by J. F. Adams, M.D. Sixth Annual Report State Board 
of Health, 1875. 

' Pwoligious Coromonies and Customs, by Wm. Burdor, B.A. London, 1851. Boston 
Public Lib., 3532.7. 



Intramural Interments. 3 

practised interment ; they had public burying-grounds, and 
their first care upon arriving in a new country was to set 
aside a plot of ground for a burial-place. 

The Chinese, from the earliest times, buried their dead, and 
used cotEns long before the Christian era. Their attachment 
to burial in the earth arises from a belief that the body must 
rest comfortably in the grave, or misfortune will follow the 
family,' 

The early Christians buried their dead in accordance 
with the HebreAv custom. They objected to cremation on 
the ground that it involved in it the idea of inhumanity to 
the body.^ With the believing Romans inhumation was 
simplj' a return to an ancient practice which had never be- 
come entirely obsolete. As Cliristian-ity spread, the nations 
which were brought under its influence and who had pre- 
viously disposed of their dead in another manner, adopted 
this custom as a part of their religion. 

The origin of the practice of incineration is lost in 
obscurity. It seems to have l)een most practised in early 
times, by the most warlike tribes ; hence the belief that it was 
adopted as a means of protecting the dead from desecration 
by the enemy. Pliny ascribes the first institution of burning 
among the Romans to the impossibility of interring human 
remains left exposed during the wars of the republic, and 
to their having discovered that the bodies of those who fell 
in distant w-ars were dug up and treated with indignity by 
the northern barbarians. In some places it was undoiil)tedly 
resorted to from sanitary motives, and in others it was prac- 
tised as a religious rite, from a belief in the purifying influ- 
ence of fire. In Asia it was extensively practised, and the 
Egyptians adopted it after they abandoned mummification, 
about the sixth century. It was extensively practised by 
the Greeks and Romans in historical times ; but in both 
countries it was preceded by inhumation, and at no time 
did it entirely supersede the latter method. 

It is not positively known when the Greeks adopted the 
custom ; they are supposed to have learned it from the Thra- 
cians, who inherited it from their progenitors, the Scythians. 
The institutes of Lycurgus (B.C. 900) specify the manner 
in Avhich burial was to be performed. In the fifth century 
B.C. it would seem that cremation and burial were both 
practised, for Plato makes Socrates say that he did not care 
whether he w^as burned or buried. 

The Romans adopted the custom of burning from the 

^ Dr. Eatwell. 

' Dr. John Jamieson, On the Origin of Cremation. Trans. Royal Society of Edin- 
burgh. Vol, viii, 1817. Boston Pub. Lib., E. 163. 1, toI. viii. 



4 City Document No. 90. 

Greeks. At first it seems to have been reserved for persons 
of distinction :ind wealth ; but after the cremation of Cor- 
nelius Sylla (B.C.<J76) the practice became more freneral. 
It reached its height in the latter days of the republic, and 
became obsolete in tlie fourth century, after Christianity be- 
came fully estal)lished.^ Children who had not cut their 
teeth, and persons killed by lightning, were not burned, but 
buried.- Ci-emation is still extensively practised in Hindos- 
tan and other P^astern countries, as well as by a number of 
uncivilized tribes in different ])arts of the woild. 

During the present century, attempts have ])een made in 
Europe and America to revive the custom, but as yet without 
much success.^ 

Mummification was practised, to some extent, l)y several 
ancient nations, especially by the Elgyptiaiis, who embalmed 
all their dead. It is estimated that 400,()0(),()()0 human 
numimies were made in Egypt, from the beginning of the 
art of embalming until its discontinuance in the seventh 
century."* 

The ancient Peruvians dried their dead in the sun, and 
interred them in a sitting posture, l)ound in cloth, the quan- 
tity of saltpetre in the ground completing the desiccation, — 
a system analogous to emlialmment."* 

From the teachings of history and tradition, we may con- 
clude that the custom of burying the dead has c(»me down 
to us from the remotest ages, and though at ditferent peri- 
ods other methods have prevailed, interment has been the 
final lot of a vast majority of the human race. 

To the three methods of disposing of the dead which have 
been recited was due the establishment of the burying- 
ground and cemetery. 

At first the dead W(>re probably buried in natural caverns, 
or, j)erhaps, in a rude grave, marked b}' a simple moimd or 
a rough stone. In proportion as man ))ecame more enlight- 
ened his resi)ect and veneration for the dead incrensed, and 
sought expression in the memorials which mark(;d their last 
rei«ting-places. The mound and stone increased in size until 
they grew into the vast tuundi and huge monoliths, wdiich 
stand to-day as the only evidences of a pre-historic race. 
The development of art Avas stimulated by this desire to 
honor the dead, and nuiral decoration furnished an early op- 
jjortunity for employment to the pencil and chisel. In por- 

' Adarng. 

' Buidcr. 

■' For a bibliography and historical sketch of Cremation, soo Cremation of the Dead, 
its history and beariii);.* upon Public Health. William Eassie, C. E., London, 1875. 
Boston I'ub. Lib., 3975.55. 

* Appleton's Enc. 



Intramural Interments. 5 

traying the history of the dead, the artist unconsciously 
wrote, for future generations, the story of the living. 

When men began to live in settled communities the dis- 
position of the remains of the dead became a matter of 
prime importance. The Romans originally used their dwell- 
ings as tombs for their deceased relatives. The same prac- 
tice prevailed among the early Greeks. 

The Thebans had a law that no one should build a house 
without providing a repository for the dead.^ Among the 
Egyptians the body, having been embalmed, was returned to 
the relatives, who enclosed it in a wooden case, made to re- 
semble a human figure, and placed it in the repository of 
their dead.- Experience, however, in course of time, dem- 
onstrated the danger of these customs, and led to the enact- 
ment of laws, by which intramural interments were gener- 
ally prohibited. The privilege was only accorded to holy 
men, or those who were regarded as public benefactors, or 
had rendered eminent services to the conmiuuity. 

The Romans permitted vestal virgins, and some illustrious 
men, to be buried within the city. The right of making a 
sepulchre for himself within the Pomperium was decreed to 
Julius Cfesar, as a singular privilege.^ 

Tile Roman law of the twelv^e tables, enacted about the 
fourth century, expressly forbade the burial or ])urning of 
the dead within the city, and continued in force many years. 

The Greeks had similar laws. The Lacedemonians were, 
however, an exception. Lycurgus taught them to bury with- 
in the limits of the city, both for the purpose of removing 
the prevalent belief that the touch of a dead body conve3'ed 
pollution ; and also to encourage the youths to deeds of valor, 
by familiarizing them with the spectacle of death. 

Burying-grounds were established without the limits of the 
cities, usually near the highways, and the dead deposited 
either in the earth or in tombs, more or less magnificent, ac- 
cording to the rank and condition of the deceased. 

When burning prevailed, the ashes were placed in cine- 
rary urns, and deposited in niches cut in the walls of the 
sepulchre, called columbaria. 

In Egypt the accumulation of mummies within the cities 
caused a serious epidemic, and led to their being deposited 
in catacombs and pyramids outside the limits of habitation. 

Severe penalties were enacted against the desecration of 
burial-places. This, however, did not prevent the interven- 
tion of the authorities, when required by the public welfare. 

1 Jamieson. 

' Intramural Interments in Populous Cities, and their influence upon health and 
epidemics, by John H. Rauob, M.D., Chicago, 1866. Boston Pub. Lib., 5796.43. 
* Burder. . 



6 City Document No. 96. 

The vast miml)er of iiitorineiits in the biirviiifi'-frrouiK'l -for 
the poor people of Rome having rendered tlie neigliborhood 
unhealthy, Augustus, Avith the consent of the Senate and 
people, gave a part of it to liis favorite Maecenas, who built 
there a magnificent house, with extensive gardens, whence 
it l)ecame one of the most healthy situations in Rome.^ 

The growth of Christianity brought al>()ut radical changes 
in respect to the interment of the dead. At first the Chris- 
tians, a despised and persecuted sect, buried their dead in 
catacombs, excavated in the hills about the city of Rome. 
There were, in the third century, twenty-five or twenty-six 
of these, corresponding with the number of i)arishes within 
the citv, and measuring, in the aij^o-reo-ate, about three hun- 
dred and fifty miles in length.- As the sect grew in power, 
and churches became estal)lish('d, the Roman law against 
intramural interments was occasionally disregarded, in the 
case of persons eminent for piety, or services to the church, 
altliough the church herself authoritatively ever set her face 
against the innovation of burial witliin the churches^ or even 
within the city. Constantine is said to l)e the first person in- 
terred within the church edifice, and even he was not deemed 
worthy to a])pi-oach nearer than the outer court or porch. 
At first the privilege was only accorded to such as these ; 
but at length the desire to be buried within the sacred pre- 
cincts, and near the relics of the saints and martyrs, became 
so great that the power of wealth was freely exercised, and 
the privilege was purchased by splendid gifts to the church. 
The civil authorities were sensible of the danger of the prac- 
tice, and lei>-islated against it several times. In 381 the 
Emperor Theodosius explicitl}'' prohibited interments iu 
cities, and ordered the remoA'al of the remains. The pro- 
hil)ition was subsequently embodied in the Justinian Code, 
and it was not until 509 that formal permission was obtained 
to establish the first Christian cemetery in Rome. 

Burials in churches became more frequent from this time 
forth, and the health of the worshippers became seriously 
endangered b}' the emanations fi-oni the decomposing re- 
mains. The bodies of pielatcs and dignitaries of the church, 
and of eminent laymen, were buried inside the walls. Those 
less fortunate, or less powerful and wealthy, were laid in the 
enclosure around the church. 

Thus originated the graveyard of the present da}' ; an evil 
gradual in its growth, but at last attaining such magnitude 
that its deleterious effect upon the public health again de- 
manded the intervention of the autliorities. 

' Burder. * Adams. 



Intramuual Interments. 7 

After the sixth century the custom of interring the dead 
in and around churches became almost universal in the West, 
notwithstanding frequent efforts were made to abolish 
it. In the East the ancient proliil)ition was more rigorously 
maintained, although exceptions were occasionally made in 
the case of important personages. Toward the close of the 
eighth century Charlemagne employed himself in restoring 
the ancient ecclesiastical discipline. Councils were fre- 
quently assembled, and from these emanated the capitularies 
or public statutes, established by the concurrence of civil 
and ecclesiastical authorities. These statutes forbade the 
interment within churches of all persons whatsoever. 

It does not appear, however, that these edicts were suffi- 
cient to prevent the practice ; for we find that more than 
twenty synods and councils, convened at different periods 
from the ninth to the seventeenth century, protested against 
it; but without avail. ^ 

In the fifteenth century the magistracy of Nuremburg 
provided for the burial of the dead outside the city ; and at 
a later period, in 1541, they forbade interments within any 
church in the city. Interments in the city of Vienna were 
forl)idden during the reign of Maria Theresa, about 1730. 
In Paris, in 1765, the nuisance became so intolerable that 
the Parliament of Paris decreed the closing of the church- 
yards for five years, and the opening of cemeteries out- 
side the city. This decree was occasioned by an almost 
universal complaint from the inhabitants of parishes of the 
noisome and sickly influence of churches and cemeteries." 
This was not sufficient, and, in 1774, the same authority was 
compelled to issue another decree against the opening of 
vaults for the admission of bodies. 

Louis XV. concurred in the prohibition of graveyards in 
Paris, and granted to the parish of St. Louis, at Versailles, 
a piece of land in the forest of Sartoris to be used as a ceme- 
tery. Louis XVI., in 1776, prohibited graveyards in cities 
and towns ; but made an exception in favor of clergy, lords, 
and patrons of churches, who were allowed to l)c buried 
under vaults, the bodies to be placed six feet under the 
lower pavement. 

In 1777 a general disinterment was commenced in Paris, 
beginning with the Cemetery of the Innocents, and the re- 
mains were removed to the catacombs under the city. 

The National Assembly, in 1790, commanded towns and 
villages to discontinue the use of their old burial-places, and 

' London Quarterly Review, Vol. 73. Boston Pub. Lib., .3134.1. 
J An Exposition of the Dangera of Interments in Cities, by Folix Pascalis, M.D., 
New York, 1823. Boston Pub. Lib., Medical Pamphlets, 18. 



8 CiTT Document No. 96. 

form others at a distance from their habitations. In 1804 
four cennoteries were authorized in the vicinity of Paris, and 
in 1874 it was found necessary to establish a new one at 
]Mery-sur-()isc, twelve miles from the city. 

The example of France in interdicting intramural inter- 
ments was folio-wed by other countries on the continent of 
Europe. The influence of physicians and a better knowledge 
of sanitary laws have resulted in the gradual closing of the 
old burial-])laces and the estal)lishment of rural cemeteries. 

In Great Britain the subject of intramural interments re- 
ceived but little attention until within the last thirty-seveu 
years, although the evil eflect upon the public health was 
noticed many years before. In 1721 an anonymous pam- 
phlet was pul)lished in London, entitled, " Seasonable 
('onsiderations on the Indecent and Dangerous Custom of 
Burying in Churches and Churchj'ards ;" but it does not 
seem to have led to any action on the part of the authorities. 
In 1740 a pestilential fever raged in Dublin, which was 
distinctly traced hy the authorities to the exhalations from 
the gravej'ards, and they were ordered to be removed out of 
the city. 

In 1839 Mr. George Alfred Walker, a London surgeon, 
published a work on the condition of the graveyards of Lon- 
don, which attracted much attention, and led to the appoint- 
ment by Parliament of a select committee of tifteen " to 
consider the expediency of framing some legislative enact- 
ments to remedy the evils arising from the interment of 
bodies within the precincts of largo towns, or of places 
densely populated." 

This committee reported on the 14th of June, 1842, ex- 
pressing the opinion that the practice of interment within 
the precincts of large towns is injurious to the health of the 
inhabitants thereof, and frequently olfensive to public de- 
cency, and recommending that intramural interments, with 
some exceptions, be prohibited.* 

A Supplementary Report on the Results of a Special In- 
quiry into the Practice of Interments in Towns, by Edwin 
Chadwick, was presented to the Home Department in 1843. 
From the evidence on the subject Mr. Chadwick arrives at 
the following conclusions: "That, inasmuch as there ap- 
pear to be no cases in which the emanations from human 
remains, in an advanced state of decom])()sition, are not of a 
deleterious nature, so there is no case in which the liability to 
danger should be incurred, either by interment or hy entomb- 
ment in vaults, which is the most dangerous, amidst the 

1 Boston Pub. Lib., 5760.50. 



Intramural Interments. 9 

dwellings of the living, — it Leing established, as a general 
conclusion, in respect to the physical circumstances of inter- 
ment, from wiiich no adequate grounds of exception have 
been established, that all interments in towns, where bodies 
decompose, contril)ute to the mass of atmospheric impurity, 
which is injurious to the public health." ' 

The Xational Society for the abolition of burial in towns 
was formed in 1845. The address of the society, which 
called for "a decided expression of public opinion," was 
distributed in circular form throughout the kingdom. 

In 1849 the Asiatic cholera destroyed no less thnn in,000 
persons in London alone, and the General Board of Health, 
consisting of Carlisle, Ashley, Edwin Chadwick, and T. S. 
Smith, was directed to cause inquiry to be made into the 
state of burial-grounds, and frame, if necessary, a scheme 
to be submitted to Parliament for the improvement of inter- 
ment in towns. Their report, submitted in 1850, takes de- 
cided ground against the practice of intramural interments.^ 

In 1851 a report on a general scheme of extra-mural 
sepulture for country towns was made to Parliament by 
Carlisle, Ashley, Chadwick, and Smith. These reports had 
the effect of bringing about the required legislation.^ 

In 1806 the Board of Health of New York city appointed 
a committee, consisting of Dr. Edward Miller and Messrs. 
John Pintnrd and Winart Van Zant, to report on measures 
necessary to secure the health of the city. This connnittee 
recommended that interments in the city be prohibited, and 
suggested that "the present burial-grounds might serve ex- 
tremely well for plantations of grove and forest trees, and 
thereby, instead of remaining receptacles of putrefying mat- 
ter and hot-beds of miasmata, might be rendered useful and 
ornamental to the city."-^ This report was instrumental in 
causing the passage of a law, which authorized the corpora- 
tion of New York to regulate, and, if necessary, to prevent 
the interment of the dead within the city. It does not ap- 
pear that this law was ever enforced. In 1822 the yellow 
fever prevailed in New York to an alarming extent, and the 
virulence of the disease in the vicinity of Trinity Church 
awakened fresh interest in the sul^ject of intramural inter- 
ments. Dr. F. D. Allen published a pamphlet on the sub- 
ject,'* in which he cites numerous cases of disease attributable 
to the exhalations from graveyards. In 1823 Dr. Felix 
Pascalis published " An Exposition of the Dangers of Inter- 

» Boston Pub. Lib., 7063.9. 

* Boiton Pub. Lib., 7063. .S. 

' On Interments within the Populous Parts of tho City of New York, 1806. 

* Documents and Facts showing the Fatal Effects of Interments in Populous Cities. 
Boston Publio Library Medical Pamplilets, 11. 



10 City Document No. 96. 

ment in Cities," ^ which to this day is an authority on the 
subject. An ordinance was passed prohibiting interments 
Avithin the city of New York, l)ut remained inopm-ative for a 
long time. The establishment of Greenwood Cemetery in 
1842, and since then of other rural cemeteries, led to the 
gradual discontimnince of the old burying-grounds, and now 
interments within the limits of the cit3'are prohibited by law. 

The reffulation of the interment of the dead in Boston was 
vested in the selectmen until 1809, Avhen by vote of the 
town it was transferred to the Board of Healtii. In 1797 
an act (C. 16, 1797) was passed, authorizing towns and dis- 
tricts to appoint a Health Committee, consisting of not less 
than five nor mcn-e than nine persons. This is probably the 
origin of Boards of Health in this Commonwealth. At a 
meeting of the town, December 5, 1798, the representatives 
were directed to apply to the General Court for a Board of 
Health. In 1799 an act was passed repealing so nnicli of 
the Act of 1797 as related to the Town of Boston, and pro- 
viding for the election ])y the people of a Board of Health, 
consi^■ting of one member from each ward of the town. This 
Board, however, had nothing to do with the ))urial of the 
dead, until, as before stated, it w'as transferred to them by 
vote of the town in 1809. At a meeting of the selectmen, 
January 17, 1810, a communication was received from the 
Board of HcMlth, expressing their willingness to accept the 
care of the bur^'ing-grounds. The first printed regulations 
of the Board are dated May 7, 1810. They divided the 
burj'ing-gronnds and cemeteries into three districts, viz. : 
the North District, comprising the North Burying-ground 
and Christ Church Cemetery ; the ?iliddle District, compris- 
ing the Granary and Chapel Burying-grounds and Chapel 
and Trinity Church Cemeteries ; South District, comprising 
the Central and South Burying-grounds. A superintendent 
was appointed over each district. The superintendents were 
required to cause tombs which were opened between the 
1st of July and 30th of September to be closed and pointed 
wdth lime within twenty-four hours after the deposit of 
bodies therein ; to cause at least three bushels of lime to be 
slaked in each cemetery on the 1st and 15th days of July, 
August, and Septeml)er. The top of any coflin was not al- 
lowed to ])e placed within three feet of the surface of the 
ground. The bottom of the first coflin i)laced in any grave 
must be at least eight feet from the surface of the ground. 
The regulations further declared that after the first of the fol- 
lowing July (1810) the old part of the North Burying-ground, 

* Boston Public Library Medical Pamphlets, 18. 



Intramural Interments. 11 

(except for the interment of people of color) and the whole 
of the Central Burying-ground, should be closed, and con- 
tinue closed for ten years. Minute regulations were pre- 
scribed for the conduct of funerals, etc. 

These regulations were continued, with slight changes, 
until the abolition of the Board of Health, in 1824. 

The city charter provided that power and authority vested 
by law in the Board of Health should be transferred to the 
City Council, "to be carried into execution by the appoint- 
ment of Health Commissioners, or in such other manner as 
the health, cleanliness, comfort, and order of the said city 
may in their judgment require." Soon after the inaugura- 
tion of the City Government a Board of Temporary Health 
Commissioners was appointed (May 3, 1822). A con- 
flict of authority soon arose between the Board of Health and 
the City Council, which continued until May 31, 1824, 
when an ordinance was passed abolishing the Board and vesting 
the duties in a Commissioner of Health and Superintendent 
of Burial-Ground and Cemeteries, acting under the direction 
of the Board of Mayor and Aldermen. All matters relating 
to the interment of the dead were placed in charge of the said 
Superintendent. As no new regulations were adopted at 
that time, it is presumed that the old regulations continued 
in force until December 25, 1826, when an ordinance relat- 
ing to the subject of interring the dead was passed. The 
rules prescribed by this ordinance differed but little from 
those previously in force. The seventh section provided 
that the Central, Chapel, and Granary Burying-grounds 
should be so far closed that no new graves should be opened 
or dug therein, nor tombs built, until the further order of 
the Mayor and Aldermen ; and that the old part of the North 
Burying-ground should be so far closed that no new graves 
should be opened or dug therein. Permission might be 
obtained from the Mayor and Aklermen to build tombs in the 
new part of the North Burying-ground and in the South 
Burying-ground. No graves or tombs could be opened from 
the 1st day of June to the 1st da}^ of October, except for the 
purpose of interring the dead, without permission of the 
Mayor and Aldermen. 

The burying-grounds and cemeteries remained in charge 
of the IVIayor and Aldermen until the organization of the 
Board of Health, in 1872. In 1849 the office of Super- 
intendent of Burial-grounds and Cemeteries was abolished 
and that of City Registrar created. An ordinance passed 
August 20, 1850, provided that no graves shall be opened 
or dug in any of the burying-grounds in the city, excepting 
at East Boston and South Boston, unless by permission of 



12 City Document No. 96. 

the Mayor and Aldermen, or the City Registrar. By ordi- 
nance of Oct. 14, 1869, the exception in favor of East 
and South Boston was removed. The present regulations 
in regard to the interment of the dead will be found on 
pages 413 to 417, inclusive, of the edition of laws and ordi- 
nances for 1876. 

The first burial-place in Boston was what is now known 
as the King's Chapel Burying-ground, and the first interment 
therein was made in 1630. For thirty years it was the only 
burial-place in the town. In 1660 a lot of land on Charter 
and SnoAvhill streets was purchased and set apart for a 
burying-ground, and in the same year another burying- 
ground was established on the Common, which then extended 
as far north as Beacon t-treet. The first lot referred to was 
the beginning of what is now called Copp's Hill Burying- 
ground, then known as the North Burying-ground. The 
lot on the Common was known as the South Burying-ground 
until about 1737, when it began to be called the Granary 
Burying-ground, because the old Granary building was 
removed that 3'ear from its former location to the present 
site of the Park-street Church, marking the southern termi- 
nation of the burying-ground. In 1660 the town ordered 
that the old burying-ground should be " wholly deserted for 
a season, and the new places appointed for burying only 
made use of." In 1708-9 and in 1711 additional land was 
purchas(!d for the enlargement of the North Burying-ground. 
In 1810 the new North Burying-ground v.-as established on 
land adj(uning the old ground. In 1819 thirty-four toml)s 
were })uilt hy Hon. Charles Wells, in a small yard adjoining 
the old ground, and called the Charter-street Burying-ground. 
The division fences between the two last-named lots and the 
old ground have been removed, and it is to all appearances 
one l)urying-ground. In 1832 a row of tombs was erected 
in what was called the Ilull-strect Cemetery, bordering on 
the north-west side of the old ground. This cemetery was 
discontinued in 1853, and the remains were removed to 
Mount Hope Cemetery in 1861. 

The South Burying-ground was sometimes called the Com- 
mon Hur\'ing-ground, from its location, and sometimes the 
Middle Burying-ground, because it was situated in the mid- 
dle burial district, Copp's Hill forming the north, and the 
Bo3'lston-street Burying-ground the south. It is, however, 
better known as the Granary Burying-ground. Originally 
the graves were only made at the westerly and northerly part 
of the yard. The oldest tombs were built near the back 
part of the yard, and, with the contiguous graves, occupy 
about one-quarter of the burial-ground. 



Intramural Interments. 13 

On the 15th of May, 1717, a vote was passed by the 
townsmen, "to enlarge the South Buiying-ground by taking 
in part of the highway on the easterly side thereof, so as 
that thereby y^ said highway be not thereby too much strait- 
ened." 

On the 19th of April, 1719, it was "Ordered, That the 
South burying-place should be enlarged next the Common or 
training-field." Under this hist vote fifteen tombs were 
built near the extreme south-west cornei' of the yard, and 
extended in a line on the south side. 

In 1722 six tombs Avere built on the same line, extending 
easterly. The other tombs on the southerlj^ side, fifteen in 
number, were built during the years 1723, 1724, and 1725 ; 
the first thirty on the easterly side, in the years 1726, 1727, 
and 1728, and the northerly thirteen in 1736. Of those on 
the northerly side, the first five were built in 1738, and the 
remaining twenty-six in 1810, and twenty-six were built on 
the westerly side during the same and next three years. 
There are sixty other tombs within the yard, whieh do not 
border upon either of its sides, one of which belongs to the 
city. In one respect the selection of the site for this ceme- 
tery was particularly unfortunate. The soil was spiingy 
and exceedingly damp, and, therefore, required drainage. 
It is said that when Judge Sullivan, at the close of the last 
century, repaired the Bellingham tomb, he found the coflin 
and remains of the old governor — who died on the 7th 
December, 1672 — floating around in the ancient vault. 

The fourth burying-groimd in point of antiquity was the 
Quaker ])urying-ground, situated on Congress street. It 
was established in 1709, and was discontinued in 1815. In 
1826, by permission of the Board of Aldermen, the remains 
were exhumed and conve^'ed to L3^nn, excepting the bodies 
of two i)erson8, which were deposited in King's Chapel Ceme- 
tery. 

In 1740 the selectmen received a petition from John 
Chambers and others, grave-diggers, representing "that the 
Old and South burying-places are so filled with dead bodies, 
they are obliged, ofttimes, to bury them four deep, praying 
it may be laid before the toAvn for their consideration." This 
caused the town authorities to look for a new burial-place ; 
but it was not until 1754 that a location Avas decided upon. 
On the 11th of October of that year the town voted to pur- 
chase a pasture at the foot of the Common, and in 1756 the 
purchase was consummated. Here was established the South 
Burying-ground, afterwards known as the Common Burying- 
ground until 1810, when, in consequence of the establish- 
ment of the burial-place on AVashingtou street, it was des- 



14 City Document No. 96. 

ignated as the Central Burying-ground. The lirst interments 
in this lot were made in graves. The first tomb was erected 
in 171)3, as far as can l)e ascertained. From this time until 
1800 a few were built each year. In 1801, 2, and 3, a large 
number were built. Boylston street then formed one boun- 
dary of tlie lot, l)ut in 1839 two rows of tombs on that 
side were discontinued, and the Boylston-street mall laid out. 
Tombs were built on the westerly side, to compensate for 
those which were discontinued. 

In 1795 a committee was appointed ])y the town to con- 
sider the subject of the buryiiig-grounds at large, and to 
report on some suitable place of deposit for the dead, in 
order that the town may be enabled to discontinue the open- 
ing of graves in the Conunon and Chapel Burying-grounds, 
The committee reported on the 6th of November, 1795. 
that, "having consulted the physicians of the town, they 
find it to be, in their opinion, that the health of the inhabi- 
tants is in danger from the crowded state of these grounds, 
and the exhalations which must frequently arise from open- 
ing graves therein. In addition to which, they find it is 
almost impossible to open new graves without disturl)ing the 
relics of the dead already interred. From an e(jual regard 
to health, for a decent respect for the living and the dead, 
they recommend to the inhabitants to adopt the following 
measures : — 

"F'irst. That no graves or new tonil)s shall be opened or 
built in either the Connnon or Chapel Burying-ground, after 
the first day of May next. 

"Second. As the South Burying-ground is already suffi- 
ciently large for the present accommodation of the inhabitants, 
and will admit of such enlargement, that the Selectmen be 
empowered to allot to any inhabitant who may appl}"^ for the 
same, sufficient ground for erecting a tomb in the ground, 
and to enlarge the said South Burying-ground in a direction 
westerly whenever the pul)lic convenience shall in their judg- 
ment require it. 

"Third. Inasmuch as in remarkably inclement weather it 
may be inconvenient for funerals to proceed to the South 
Burying-ground, that the selectmen cause to be erected under 
the vestry-room of the stone chapel, or in some other part 
of the ("lKq)cl Bur3'iiig-ground, a vault or tomb suital)le for 
temporary deposit, in which any of the inhabitants who may 
incline thereto shall have the right to deposit the bodies of 
their deceased friends or relatives, for a term of time not 
exceeding twenty-four hours (unless in particular cases), by 
permission of the selectmen, until it may be convenient for 
them to remove such bodies to the place of final interment." 



Intramural Interments. 15 

The report was accepted by the town. 

The South Biirying-ground, on Washincton iitreet, was 
opened for burials in 1810. It was formerly the location of 
the gallows, and culprits were generally l)uried in deep 
graves within the cemetery, near the place of their execution. 
A large portion of it was marshy, and consequently wet, and 
hardly fit for purposes of sepulture. Until 1827 inter- 
ments Avere made in graves. In that year tombs were first 
built at the sides of the yard, and from year to year others 
were erected, until the number amounted to one hundred and 
sixty-two. In 1837 a large quantity of proper soil was 
carted upon it, and the surface graded. In 18t)(3 the tombs 
on the northerly side were discontinued, and a strip of land 
ceded to an abutter on that side for yard-room, and another 
portion for a hotel. 

In addition to these burying-grounds there have been five 
cemeteries built beneath church edifices in the city proper. 
That under Christ Church, Salem street, contains thirty- 
three tombs. Interments were made here very soon after 
the erection of the church, in 1723. The first Trinity 
Church, a wooden building, consecrated in 1735, contained 
twentj'-five tombs. The new church, consecrated in 1829, 
and destroyed by fire November 9, 1872, contained fifly-five 
tombs. After the fire the remains were removed by the 
friends and families of the deceased. 

The original King's Chapel, erected about 1688, contained 
several tombs, but the exact number is not known. The 
present building, erected iu 1749-50, contained twenty 
tombs in the basement, and a large vault, called the strangers 
tomb, under the tower. 

St. Paul's Church contains sixty-four tombs. In December, 
1822, the proprietors of St. Paul's petitioned for leave to 
use the cellar of the building for interring the dead, giving 
as a reason that, having erected the church at great expense, 
they had incurred a del)t, from which they could not be re- 
lieved unless their prater was granted. Formal permission 
was granted September 1, 1823, and the cemetery has been 
in use since that time. By chapter 28, Acts of the year 
1879, further interment in these tombs was prohibited, and 
preparations are being made to remove the remains to 
another resting-place.^ 

In January, 1823, the proprietors of Park-street Church 
petitioned the City Council for leave to erect tombs under 
their church, and the petition Avas granted. Thirty tombs 
were built. In 1862 the cemetery was discontinued, and the 

» This historical sketch of the burying-grouuds and cemeteries of Boston is compiled 
mainly from ShurtlefiTs Topographical JJcscriptioa of Boston. ^'Seaton, 1871. Boston 
Pub. Lib., 4451.20. ''- x 



16 City Document No. 96. 

i-cnmins removed to Mount Auburn and deposited in a lot 
purchased by the society for the purpose. 

In June, 1823, the proprietors of Brom field-street Church 
petitioned for a like privilege. This drew the attention of 
the City Council to the subject, and the petition Avas referred 
to a connnittee, of which the Mayor, Josiah (^uincy, was 
chairman, to consider the expediency of granting such a 
right. Tliis conuiiittee reported adversely to the petitioners, 
in a very able report, which may bo found in Volume 1 of 
the City Records. In concluding their report the connnittee 
reconnnended the prohibition of the erection of new tombs 
within the ancient peninsula of Boston ; the adoption of 
measures ultimately tending to exclude all burials hereafter 
within the peninsula, and devising methods for applying the 
only perfect and satisfactory remedy, by adopting some com- 
mon place of burial for all the inhabitants ; selected, if pos- 
sible, beyond the limits of the city, but certainly beyond the 
limits of tiie peninsula, of an extent sufficient to meet the 
future exigencies of the population. The resolutions 
embodying these recommendations were adopted l)y the 
City Council. 

Interments, however, continued to be made in the several 
burying-grounds, altliough from time to time vigorous pro- 
tests against the practice appeared in the pul)lic prints. In 
1831 Mount Auburn Cemetery was established, and this in 
some degree met the wants of the constantly increasing 
population of the city. The records of the city arc 
silent upon the subject until 1847, when the following 
api)ears in the inaugural gddress of the Mayor (Josiah 
Quincy, Jr.) : — 

Anothor subject wliicli demands j-our attention is the Inu-ial of the 
dead in the city. Tliere are reasons connected botli with healtli and the 
natural feelings of nniii that have caused almost all lart^e cities to forbid 
interments witiiin tiuiir limits, except under particular circumstances. 
In oin- own no burials an', made in graves. There are in the city, in- 
cluding one at South Boston, not used, nine burial-places, containing 
nine hundred and thirty-three toml)s. There are six churches with 
cemeteries below them, "containing two hundred and seventy-nine tombs, 
making in all oiu; thousand two hundred and twelve tombs. As it respects 
tombs owned by families 1 would suggest the propriety of preventing 
any bodies beiifg deposited in them excepting members of the family, 
and of fixing a time after which no interments whatever should be 
made. As to the tombs belonging to undertakers and others, where 
bodies are d(!posited on the pa^'-ment of a fee, and where it has been the 
practice after a few years to remove the remains to make way for others, 
and thus render them a source of constant income, T recommend that 
it be ordaintid tiiat these and all tombs, when once filled, shall be closed 
forever. This is due to tiie hi-alth au(t feelings of the living, and to the 
respect due to the dead. This may in tiiue render it necessary to pro- 
vide burial-places out of the city, which by charging a small fee for the 
rights of sepulchre, could be done without expense to the city, and 



Intramural Interments. 17 

would at least enable the poor man, when he dieil, to feel tliat his dust 
was to rest in a quiet grave. 

Ill 1849 Mayor Biofelow, in his inaugural address, refer- 
ring to a threatened visitation of the cholera, says : — 

In this connection, I would renew the siio;aestions of my honored 
predecessor in reference to burials within the Innits of our dense popu- 
lation. Upon this point of economical regulation we are entirely 
behind tiic age. The average annual number of deaths for some years 
has exceeded three tliousand live hundred. Making all allowances for 
interments in Mount Auburn, and other suburban cemeteries, there 
cannot be much less than two thousand human bodies annually con- 
signed to their rest within the boundaries of Boston, — all de^josited in 
tombs. Such an amount, of accumulating decomposition cannot but 
tend, in some degree, to impair the purity of the atraosjjhere ; and the 
evil, as our population increases, will daily become more serious. It 
cannot be doubted that a desirable bnriallot may be obtained at no great 
distance from Boston, and in the vicinity of some of our numerous rail- 
roads, which would furnish ample i'acilities for conveyance of funeral 
trains. The example of the enlightened cit}" of Roxbury,' in this 
respect, is worthy of our imitation. For a lot, similar to that recently 
consecrated there, the expense would be inconsiderable, and would soon 
be liquidated by charging a small fee for the right of sepulture. 

Tlie committee to whom this address was referred reported 
in April, 1849, recommending tlie })assage of an ordinance, 
prohibiting burials in any part of South Boston nortli of 
Dorchester and east of Seventh streets, excepting in the 
tombs of Saint Matthew's Church. Appended to this report 
are the depositions of several persons in regard to the dan- 
gerous condition of one of the burying-grounds in South 
Boston.^ 

This committee afterwards ol)tained the passage of an act 
(chap. 150, 1849), authorizing the City of 13oston to estab- 
lish a public cemetery in any town in the Commonwealth 
(the consent of the town to be first obtained), and to make 
and establish all suitable rules, orders, and regulations for the 
interment of the dead therein. 

On the 27th of September, 1849, this committee reported 
that they had obtained this act, and recommended the passage 
of an order, authorizing them to purchase a suitable lot of 
land, Avithout the limits of the city, at an expense not 
exceeding $25,000. 

The committee again reported, on the 11th of October, 
1849,' giving their views of a plan for a cemcteiy, and urging 
the passage of the order which they had previously otfered. 
The committee say : "The committee believe it to be con- 

^ Alluding to the establishment by Koxbury of ForcBt Hill Cetuotory. 
' City Document No. 2S, 1849. 
=• City Document No. 51, 1849. 



18 City Document No. 96. 

ceded by all, that no more interments should take place 
within the limits of the City of Boston, . . . the rea- 
sons for which must be obvious. . . . The increasinjr 
growth of our population, the limited amount of soil pos- 
sessed l)y us, the evidences, furnished by all preceding gen- 
erations, of the poisonous nature of the decomposing matter 
of human bodies, all conspire to render this a fixed fact." 

The connnittee quote an article which ajjpeared in the 
Loudon '■ Thnes" of December 29, 1848, on intramural inter- 
ments, which says: "This snbject is incomparably painful 
and revolting, but it is, at the same time, of such importance 
to the heuhh of the conminnity, that it must be enforced 
upon the public attention again and again. Any measure for 
the health of the metropolis, which shall not include as one 
of its principal features an absolute veto upon intramural 
interments, will be incomplete and ineffective. Let no one 
deceive himself with the idea that, however fortunately he 
may be placed, he is preserved from the danger of infection 
from this sonrce." 

The committee express their firm conviction, that the voice 
of reason and Christianity both call aloud and demand of the 
City Government the immediate passage of a law which shall 
close, at once and forever, the burial-grounds, as well as all 
other places of interment, within the city limits. 

During the foUowinir December the same committee made 
another report, giving the results of their endeavors to 
secure a suitable lot for a cemetery.^ A list of the lots 
which they examined is given, and they recommend the pur- 
chase of a lot in Maiden. They again urge the passage of 
the order making the appropriation. 

The subject was tinall}^ referred to the next City Govern- 
ment. 

In his inaugural address for 1850, Mayor Bigelow again 
alluded to the subject, as follows : — 

I would airain call the attention of the City Council to the necessit}' 
of making early and adequate provision, bej'ond the boundaries of the 
city, for tlie burial of the dead. Every one of our cemeteries is already 
full, to an extent which, to a greater or less degree, is prejudicial to the 
IJublic health. Indeed, during the jjrevalence of the epidemics it became 
necessary to disuse several of our burying-grounds, not reall}' on 
account of oll'ensive exhalations, but for want of actual S2)ace for addi- 
tional interments. This state of things is discreditable to Boston, and 
is inconsistent with a due regard to the safety of its citizens. It may 
easily be remedied without involving any very large expenditure. 

This part of the address was referred to a special com- 
mittee, who were also requested to examine existing ordi- 

' City Document No. 69, 1849. 



Intramural Interments. 19 

nances, and see what amendments were necessaiy. The 
committee reported 11th of December, 1850.^ The report 
gives the number of burials in the city for 1849 (l,i79) and 
ten months of 1850 (689). The burials ia the city proper 
were mostly in fiimily tombs, and the committee do not 
think that the public good requires, or that public opinion 
would sanction, the passage of an ordinance by which all in- 
terments in family toml)s would be prohibited. The statistics 
of each year indicate that the number of interments in tombs 
is annually decreasing ; a few years will show a more marked 
decrease than during the past five years. It is a matter of 
congratulation that a subject of this nature can be safely left 
to the gradual, but sure and potent, influence of a correct 
public sentiment ; and that, by the silent operation of agen- 
cies which now engage public attention, many of the evils 
attending the use of tombs in our city will be corrected 
without the interference of stringent municipal regulations. 
The enormous abuses which have been brought to the public 
notice by the recent investigation of the subject of intramu- 
ral burials in England, can never, it is thought, exist in this 
country. The idea that the revolting and terrible scenes 
which have been officially authenticated before the pro[)er 
authorities in England, in relation to the burial of the dead, 
can ever occur in New England, is an insult alike to the nat- 
ural feelings, and to the moral sense of our population. 
There is no similarity in the condition of the two communi- 
ties in relation to the subject of the burial of the dead, and 
the popular sentiment and legislative action which have 
recently taken place in England are not applicable to this 
country, particularly to a city like Boston. 

The committee advertised for a lot for a cemetery, but 
fiiiled to find one which was satisfactory. Referring to two 
cemeteries which are about to be started at dilferent points 
from the city, the committee are of the opinion that the wants 
of the citizens will be well served by their establishment, 
and recommend that no further action be taken upon the 
subject of purchasing for a cemetery to be controlled by the 
city. The committee recommend that a lot of land, owned 
by the city, situated on the borders of Dedliam, be set apart 
for a cemetery, to be used when the wants of the population 
shall require additional burial facilities, and that an appro- 
priation be made for ornamenting the grounds with forest 
trees, in anticipation of its future use for that purpose. 
This report was accepted. 

In 1851 Mount Hope Cemetery was established by a pri- 

' City Document No. 39, 1850. 



20 City Document Xo. 96. 

vatc corporation, organized under the General Statutes, 
Chap. 2>(, and was consecrated June 24, 1852. 

In his inaugural address, 1851, Mayor Bigelow expressed 
his satistaclion that during the preceding year private 
enterprise had, in a great measure, remedied the wants of 
the community in regard to suitahk^ l)urial accommodations, 
])v tile establishment of extensive and well-located cemeteries 
in Maiden and Dorchester.^ 

In his inaugural address, in 1853, Mayor Seaver says: — 

The practice of interments of tlie dead witliiii the limits of the city 
has l)een a subject of anxiety for several years past, and I tliink tlio 
time lias arrived Avlien the question should l^e seriously considered as to 
what measures are j)roper to be taken to prohibit it. Many intelligent 
medieal g-entlemen are of opinion tlial the ])ublie health demands sueh pro- 
hiliition. :unl it has been hoped that tiie increasing disposition among tlie 
citizens to provide bu/ial lots in tlie vicinity of the cit}- will, at no A'cry 
distant day, lead to the discontinuance of this practice. . . . The 
subject has, I am aware, many dillieulties, but 1 trust that some 
measures may be adopted to remove the evil without too great an in- 
fringement oil private rights, or the \\()unding of pi-ivate feeling. 

On the 28th of February an order was passed directing 
the Mayor to petition the Legislature for an act authorizing 
the Mayor and Aldermen to prohibit any and all interments 
within the limits of the city proper when they shall deem it 
ex})edieiit to do so. 

On the 14th of March an order was passed directing the 
City Kegistrar to grant no license to bury or inter any dead 
body in either of the following-named burial grounds, on 
and after the first day of the following July, viz. : the 
Ilull-street I^urial-ground, the Granaiy Burial-ground, the 
Chapel Burial-ground, and the tombs under Trinity Church, 
Christ's Church, and Park-street Church. 

Later in the year the wardens and vestry of Trinity and 
Christ's Church petitioned to be exempted from the terms of 
the order. Their petitions were referred to a committee who 
reported that the order was wise and judicious and recom- 
mended that the petitioners have leave to withdraw. 

In 1854 the proprietors of St. Matthew's Chiu-ch peti- 
tioned that interments might be prohibited in the cemetery 
of that church. The petition was referred to a committee, 
who i-eported, July 24, "That their attention has been par- 
ticularly called to the subject of intramural interments in 
those places in the city which were excepted from the order 
of the lioard of 1853, and they are fully satistied that intra- 
nuiral interments should be abridged within this city as far 
as possible, and that no measure appertaining to the public 



'Woodlnwu aud Mount Hope. 



Intramural Intermknts. 21 

health is so important as this." They recommencled the 
passage of an order closing certain burial-grounds. The 
report was recommitted. 

The committee again reported, July 31, taking stronger 
grounds than 1)ofore against the practice of intranniral inter- 
ments ; they say : — 

The committee have in no way changed their views in regard to 
interments in the City of Boston. The territory is so limited, and the 
increase of population such, as to render it morally certain that the accu- 
mulation of decomposing human bodies at the ordinary rate of moi-tality, 
if burials are continued, must prove essentialh' prejudicial to the living. 
Aside from the combined testimony of all intelligent medical men. to 
the evil consequences of stowing decaying animal remains under 
churches and in tombs, in compact settlements, it is the common senti- 
ment of this community, freely expressed, that burials should no longer 
be tolerated in Boston. Where an opinion is advanced in opposition to 
this philosophical conclusion, it is generally based on some reference to 
a property interest. Throughout Great Britain measures have been 
energetically adopted to prevent further interments in populous cities. 
If, by the increase of a terrible nuisance, the people cannot occupy 
residences contiguous to these vast receptacles of the dead, in sev- 
eral sections of the city, on account of the otfensive odors perpetually 
wafted from them through the air, — a condition of things that may cer- 
tainly be anticipated, — it is an act of humanity, as well as official obliga- 
tion, to prevent a calamity which has had its origin from such a source 
in other cities. A train of injurious ett'ects arising from fcetid exhala- 
tions and destructive gases emanating from putrid animal matter might 
be collected in melancholy array, to sustain the position taken liv tlie 
committee; but the fact that a simple declaration of the facts set forth 
in the history of intramural burials are all that the circumstances of the 
case require. Several rural cemeteries in the vicinity, distinguished 
for beauty of location, are accessible at all seasons, and at moderate 
prices. A large majority of citizens, bereft of their friends by death, 
prefer these tastefully prepared grounds, where no encroachments inci- 
dent to the march of business would hereafter disturb the sacred re- 
mains of tljose deposited there. A knowledge, however, of the conse- 
quences that may follow a continuance of the custom of intramural 
burials in the midst of a thicklj' inhabited cit}' must obviously, upontlic 
broad principle of self-preser\^ation, be abandoned, and it will redound 
to the official credit of the Board of Health to close every yard and 
forbid the opening of another tomb in Boston, till their present con- 
tents have entirely disappeared. 

The report was laid on the tahle and the committee were 
requested to consider the expediency of prohibiting the 
interment of the dead in any burial-place within the limits of 
the city. In response to this order the committee reported 
recommending that the further consideration of the subject 
be postponed until the city could provide a buri;d-phice 
beyond the city limits. 

On the 9th of October an order was adopted directing the 
City Registrar to issue no permits for burials in the burying- 
ground on Dorchester, Sixth, and F streets, and under St. 
Matthew's Church, and in Copp's Hill ground. 



22 City Documknt No. 9H. 

In 1855, Mayor Smith, in his inan<>ural address, recom- 
mended that a tract of laud sitnated in Rcadville, belonging to 
the city, shonld l)e set apart for a burial field and suitably 
ornamented. lie complained of the oflensive condition of the 
tombs in the AN'ashington-street Burying-gronnd, and recom- 
mended that they be sunk underground below the sidewalk 
and an iron fence substituted for the stone wall in front. He 
says : — 

Burials witliin tlie city are not to be continued after Api-il, without 
special perniission, under peculiar eircum.'^tance.s, and then but tempo- 
rarilv. ^Masses of decomposing animal remains in tombs and under 
churclies cannot remain there with impunity in the heart of a city. An 
interdiction of intramural bui'ials is the Urst sanitary law that should be 
rigidly obseiwed. 

During the 3'ear active measures were undertaken to d»^- 
crease the luuuber of burials within the city limits and to 
abate the nuisances which then existed from this cause. 

An order was passed, April 1(), authorizing the committee 
to sink the tombs in the South Bui-ying-ground below the 
level of the ground, and to remove entirely the tombs owned 
by the city. 

On the 23d of April the Committee on Cemeteries were 
authorized to offer each owner of a tomb within the limits 
of the city a sub-soil lot in one of the suburban cemeteries, 
on con<]ition that the right to the tomb be forever relin- 
quished to the city, to the end that the tomi) ma}^ Ije forever 
closed. 

On the 10th -of September the City Registrar was directed 
not to issue permits to undertakers to deposit bodies in 
tombs for purposes of speculation. 

On the 24th of September the Mayor sent a coihmimica- 
tion to the Board of Aldermen, calling attention to an act 
passed by the last Legislature in relation to burials, which, 
among other things, authorized owners of tombs to appeal to 
a jury from the order of the Board of Health, in regard to 
closing a tomb, lie expressed the opinion that the act was 
liable to occasion great expense to the city by causing intermi- 
nable lawsuits. It completely paralyzed the efforts of the 
city to gradually abolish intramural intei-ments and arrested 
the wise and judicious measures which had been adopted to 
tliat end. He n'commended that the orders adopted March 
14, 1^53, and October D, 1H54, be rescinded and burials 
})e permitted in any and all burial-grounds and tombs in 
Boston. 

The comnuniication w^as referred to a committee, who 
reported an order rescinding and declaring null and void the 
orders referred to. 



Intramural Interments. 23 

Mt. Hope Cemetery was conveyed to the city by deed 
dated July 31, 1857, for the sum of $35,000. The Board of 
Trustees was organized Feb. 19, 1858, and they submitted 
their first report in in 1859.^ In his annual report for 1859,- 
the City Physician, Dr. Henry G. Clark, congratulated the 
City Council that the discussion of the subject of intramural 
interments has been forever terminated by the establishment 
of Mt. Hope Cemetery, — "thus removing the last olistruc- 
tion to the discontinuance of a practice fraught with so much 
discomfort and danger to the living." Four and three-fourths 
acres have been set oif for the benefit of the inhabitants of 
the city, free of charge, and is known as the City Cemetery. 
In 1868 the city purchased an additional lot of twenty acres 
for $14,000. The cemetery contains, at the present time, an 
area of about one hundred and five acres. 

Undoubtedly the origin of extra-mural interment is to be 
traced to the fact that the ancients early perceived that they 
could not retain the remains of the dead in their habit.itions 
with impunity to the living. Embalmment miiiht remove 
the ofi'ensiveness, but the accumulation of remains in course 
of time soon became too great to be retained within the 
limits of the cities, and too burdensome a care for the sur- 
vivors ; therefore a special place of deposit became necessary.^ 
Cremation likewise demanded a place for the preservation of 
the ashes, and involved much additional expense ; in fact, 
special objections attended every method of disposing of the 
dead ; but inhumation was probably shown, by experience, to 
be least objectionable of all, when performed under proper 
restrictions. Hence the most ancient practice of any, that 
of putting the body away in a grave or tomb, to be resolved 
into its original elements by the natural methods, again 
prevailed. The evil efi"ects of this method arise from its 
abuse. 

It would seem almost unnecessary, at the present advanced 
stage of sjinitary knowledge, to endeavor to prove that the 
burial of tlie dead in the vicinity of habitations is injurious 
to the health of the community ; yet it may not be deemed 
superfluous to cite a few of the manj' instances on record, 
to show the evil effects of the practice. 

The decomposition of bodies gives rise to a very large 
amount of carbonic acid. Ammonia and an offensive putrid 
vapor are also given off". The air of most cemeteries is 



1 City Doo. No. 10, 1859. 

= City Doc. No. 9, 1859. 

^ Dr. Latour, in " L'Uiiion Medicale," remarks", that if the human race had, for the 
last three thousand years, practised embalming, there would not have been to-day a 
portion of the earth's surface which was not occupied by a mummy. 



24 City Document Ko. 96. 

richor in c;irl)()iiic acid (7 to per thousand — Ramon de 
Luna), and the organic matter is perceptibly larger when 
tested by potassium permanganate. In vaults, the air con- 
tains much carbonic acid, carbonate or sulphide of amnio- 
niinn, nitrogen, hydro-sulphuric acid, and organic matter. 
Fungi and germs of infusoria abound.^ 

The influence of these emanations of health is manifest in 
proportion to the degree of concentration. It is evident that 
in a very concentrated form they may cause asphyxia and 
sudden and complete extinction of life. In less concentrated 
form the result may be a de[)ression of the vital powers, and 
a disturbance of the healthy functions of the system. If these 
effects are often repeated, and the putrefactive emanations 
long applied, they may produce fevers, or impart to fevers 
due to other causes a typhoid or low putrid character. Con- 
tagious material may also be })resent inthe efiiuvia from dead 
bodies. The putrefactive exhalations may cause the most 
develope<l form of typhus fever. ^ 

The disorders commonly complained of in the neighbor- 
hood of burial-grounds are headaches, diarrhoea, and ulcer- 
ated sore throats. According to a report of tlie French 
Academy' of Medicine, the putrid emanations of Pere-la- 
Chaise, Montmartre, and IMontparnasse, have caused frightful 
diseases of the throat and lungs, to which numbers of both 
sexes fall victims every year. " Thus a dreadful throat dis- 
ease, which batHes the skill of our most experienced medical 
men, is traced to the absori)ti()n of vitiated air into the wind- 
pipe, and has been observed to rage with the greatest vio- 
lence in those quarters situated nearest the cemeteries."^ 

In 17(54 Dr. Ilaguenot, a professor in the University of 
Montpelicr, had his attention called to the danger of intra- 
mural interment by an incident which ho relates, as fol- 
lows : — 

On the 17tli of August, 17(U, tlio body of a layman was conveyed to 
the cluu'cli of Notre l)anit' : while h)\venntj^ the corpse a man fu-st went 
down to support the coflin, and fell senseless; another followed to 
assist him, and, thougii drawn out in time, was alllicted with a severe 
illness ; the third was drawn up immediattdy ; a fourth dared the 
danger, and died as soon as he had entered the vault; the fifth came 
out once to recover stren<;th, and, returning the second time, staggered 
from the ladder and fell dead. The bodies at last were drawn up with 
hooks. In the neigliborhood of the church, where the above calamity 
took place, the small-pox broke out and raged with great violence. 
Dr. Ilagutjnot made many experiments, showing its influence on caus- 
ing fatal or epidemic diseases.'* 

' Dr. Parkca' Practical Ilygicno. Boston Pub. Lib., 37C6.77. 
' Hygiene and Public Health, N.Y., 1879. 
=• Eassic. 
* Pascal is. 



Intramuuat. Interments. 25 

Dr. Maret, of Dijon, in a book published in 1773, relates 
that "a catarrhal allection, or influenza, existed in Saulien, a 
populous town of Burgundy. Two persons who died with 
it were buried beside each other, in graves dug under the 
pavement of the parish church, within an interval of twenty- 
three days. The coffin of the first accidentally brolce, and a 
quantity of putrid fluid was effused, which in an instant filled 
the whole building with a stench intolerable to the by- 
standers, and out of one hundred and seventy persons one 
hundred and forty were seized with putrid malignant fever, 
which assumed the character of an epidemic, diflfering only 
in intensity and fatality.^ 

Dr. Navier, an eminent physician of Chalons, wrote in 
1775 on the sul)ject of inhumation. He states that the con- 
fidence Avith which cemeteries were suffered to exist in large 
and pf)pulous cities is founded on the erroneous belief that 
bodies in the earth are very soon destroyed ; but this is far 
from being the case. He ascertained that four years are not 
a sufficient period for this purpose ; and relates that, having 
examined three bodies disinterred, — the one after twenty, the 
second after eleven, the third after seven years, — he found 
the bones were still invested with some flesh and integu- 
ments ; from which it is certain that, Avhatever receptacles of 
the dead are opened, there is unavoidably a contamination 
of the air, or some attacks of disease occasioned or in- 
creased ; this he says he has often witnessed. He attributes 
the abuses which existed in burying-grounds at that time to 
the selfish and unreasonable custom of burying the dead 
among the living, — a custom kept in operation by vanity, 
avarice, and superstition.' 

During the general disinterment of the remains of the dead 
in Paris, in 1785, a number of grave-diggers were killed on 
the spot by the poisonous gases which arose from the graves, 
although the exhumation was performed in the winter. The 
neighborhood of the Cemetery of the Innocents had become 
extremely unhealthy, and the neighbors had complained for 
several years of the offensiveness of the cemetery. Since the 
removal of the remains the vicinity has become very healthy. 
M. Fourcroy, who superintended the disinterment, wished to 
make further researches into the nature of the gases evolved 
from bodies ; but he could find no grave-digger who could be 
induced, even by a promised reward, to assist in its collec- 
tion, because it resulted in almost sudden death if inhaled in 
a concentrated form near the body, and even at a distance, 
when diluted and diffused through the atmosphere, produced 

^ Pascalis. 



26 City Document No, 96. 

depression of the nervous system, and an entire disorder of 
its functions. 

In 1814 a battalion of militia was stationed in a lot on 
Broadway, the rear of M'hich bounded on Potter's Held, from 
whence a most deadly etlhivia arose. A number of the 
soldiers were attacked with diarrhrea aud fever. The}' were 
removed at once ; one of the sick died, and the others rapidly 
recovered. It was the opinion of Dr. Joseph Ackerly, that 
Trinity church-yard was an active cause of the yellow fever 
in New York in 1S22, and that it agi^ravated the malionity 
of the disease in its vicinity. The effluvia was so oliensive 
as to annoy passengers on the surrounding streets before the 
yellow fever commenced. The virulence of the disease in 
the immediate neighborhood of the cemetery called for active 
measures on the part of the authorities, and the yard was 
covered with quicklime, tifty-two casks being used. During 
the operation the excessive stench caused several of the 
laborers employed in the work to vomit. ^ 

In 1828, Professor Bianchi explained how the dire reap- 
pearance of the plague in Modcna was due to an excavation 
made in the ground where, three hundred years previously, 
the victims of the disease had been interred."^ The outbreak 
of the plague in Egypt, in 1823, was traced to the opening 
of a disused burial-ground at Kelioub, fourteen miles from 
Cairo.- In 1843, when the parish church of Menchinhamp- 
ton W'as rebuilding, the soil of the burial-ground, or what 
was superfluous, was disposed of for manure, and deposited 
in many of the neighl)oring gardens. The result was that 
the town was nearly decimated.^ 

Tardieu states that in 1830, at the Marche des Innocents, 
on the site of an old cemeter}', temporary burials were made, 
and a ditch was dug twelve feet by seven, and ten feet deep. 
"When the pavement was removed and about six inches of 
sand beneath it, they came upon a l)lack, greasy soil, tilled 
with bones and pieces of coffins, and exhaling such fetid 
odors that one of the workmen was suddenly suffocated. At 
Riom, in Auvergne, the earth of an ancient cemetery was dug 
up to embellish the city. A little while after an epidemic 
occurred, which carried off a great number of persons, and 
was most fatal near the cemetery. The same thing caused 
an epidemic, six years before, in a small town of the same 
province, called Embert.^ 

The epidemic of yellow fever in Charleston, S. C, in 1838- 
39, was attributed to the decomposition of animal and vege- 

1 Allen. 
' Eassie. 
^ A Treatise on Hygiene and Public Health, N. Y., 1379. 



Intramural Interments. 27 

table matter. A report upon the subject recommended burj--- 
ing the dead without the limits of the city.' 

Dr. Shank^ relates the case of a man who died of cholera 
in California, in 1850, and who was buried with his cloak 
around him. The natives exhumed the body for the purpose 
of getting the cloak, and six of them died of cholera. 

During the prevalence of the cholera in Burlington, Iowa, 
in July, 1850, a number of the dead were interred in the 
city cemetery. No deaths occurred in the neighborhood of 
the cemetery until about twenty had been buried there ; 
after this, until the epidemic ceased, cases occurred, and 
always in the direction from the cemetery in which the wind 
blew.^ 

During the epidemic of yellow fever at New Orleans, in 
1853, it appears that in the fourth district the rate of mor- 
tality was four hundred and fifty-two per thousand of the 
population, being more than double that of any other district. 
There are three extensive cemeteries in this district, in Avhich 
were buried during the preceding year nearl}" three thousand 
bodies. The third ward of this district contained all the 
cemeteries and most of the vacheires, and the proportion of 
deaths in this ward was five hundred and eight per thousand. 
The authorities were advised to close the cemeteries within 
the city against future use.^ 

The virulence of the cholera in London, in 1854, was en- 
hanced by the excavations made for sewers in the site where, 
in 1665, the victims of the plague were buried.^ 

In 1855 the yellow fever carried off" forty-five per cent, of 
the population of Norfolk and Portsmouth, Va. In a paper 
upon the subject,^ Dr. Bryant attributes the virulence of the 
disease to decomposing animal matter. He recommends the 
disinterment of the dead, and their removal to a distance of 
not less thiui eight miles from the city, together with the 
total prohibition of intramural, or even suburban, cemeteries. 
He believes that if this is not done it is unquestionable that 
sporadic, and, at intervals, epidemic yellow fever will pre- 
vail. 

The investigation by the committee of Parliament, in 
1842, elicited a vast amount of conclusive testimony as to 
the evil etfects of the exhalations from bnryiug-grounds and 
cemeteries upon the public health. It was shown that typhus 

' Ranch. 

^ Hay's Medical Journal. 

' Rauch. 

* Report of the Sanitary Commission on the Epidemic of Yellow Fever in 1853, 
published by authority of the City Council of N.O., by Dr. E. H, Barton, 1854. 

^ Coopor " On the Cause of Some Epidemics," Glascow, 1874. 

6 American Journal of Medical Sciences, April, 1856. Boston Pub. Lib., 3736.1. 
Vol. xxxi. 



28 City Document No. 96. 

and other fevers were prevalent in the neighborhood of suoh 
places. Persons employed upon the grounds testitied to 
sulfering from inhaling the ftt'tid odors which arose from the 
graves and vaults. Houses in the vicinity of burying- 
grounds were found to be infected and rendered unhealthy 
b}' the poisonous gases. In his testimony before the com- 
mittee, Sir James Fellowes, M.D., says : — 

It becomes a serious question with an increased and increasing poj^u- 
lation U2)on what rational grounds sucli an oljjectionable feature can be 
longer continued without danger to the pul>lic health. 

Dr. Southwood Smith, of London, states that "the miasms 
arising from church-yards are in general too much dihited 
by the surrounding air to strike the neighboring Inhabitants 
with sudden and severe disease ; yet they may materially in- 
jure the health, and the evidence appears to me to be decisive 
that they often do so."^ 

James Copeland, M.D., Censor of the Ro^^al College of 
Physicians, says : — 

I believe that the health of large towns is influenced by four or five 
particular circumstances : the first, and 2)rol)ably the most important, 
is the burial of the dead in lar<^e towns. In considering the burials in 
large towns, we have to consicler not only the exhalations of the gases, 
and the emanations of the dead into the air, but the effect it has upon 
the sub-soil, or the water drank by the inhabitants. 

Other eminent physicians testified to the same eifect. 
Mr. Chad wick sums up the result of his investigations, as 
follows : — 

There is no doubt that the emanations from human remains are of a 
nature to produce fatal diseases, and to depress the general liealth of 
all who are ex{)osed to them, and that interments in tlie vaults of 
churches, or in graveyards surrounded by inhabited houses, contribute 
to the mass of atmospheric and other impurities by which the general 
health and average duration of life of the inhabitants are diminished. 

Numerous cases of infection, caused by the emanations 
from l)urial-grounds, could bo quoted from the medical 
authorities ; t>ut it is believed to be unnecessary. Enough 
has been said to sliow that the removal of the dead is essential 
to the safety of the living. 

We have thus briefly endeavored to trace the history of 
intrannn-al interments, and to present some facts perti- 
nent to the sul)ject. It would seem that a natuial feeling 
of love, and the dread of parting from those dear to him, 
has prompted man to keep the remains of his kindred 
and friends near him ; while, on the other hand, the dictates 

' Chadwick, 



Intramukal Interments. 29 

of pniclence warned him of the danger of so doing. In 
fact, the history of the subject shows a continual struggle 
between the aftectional nature and sound reason, — a conflict 
between tlie head and the heart. The hiws of nature cannot 
be violated with impunity. Nature ordains that, when life is 
extinct, the materials composing all living forms shall return 
to their natural affinities, to be assimilated, and spring into 
new life again. An}' practice inconsistent with this order is 
resented. It would seem as though, in order to secure this 
result, the decomposing human body is made one of the most 
horrible and oflensive olijects that can offend the senses of 
the living. The onl}' true way is to connnit the body to the 
earth, and permit the repulsive process of decomposition to go 
on unseen. This can only be properly done in rural cemeter- 
ies, where the space will permit of allowing the dead to rest 
undisturl)ed until the body returns to dust. Within the city 
limits land is too valuable to be devoted to such uses. The 
wants of the living and the demands of business must 
necessarily encroach upon the dead ; besides, there is some- 
thing incongruous in associating the peaceful sleep of death 
with the din and bustle of city life. In the words of Dr. 
Jacob Bigelow : — 

We regard the relics of our deceased friends and kindred for what 
they have been, and not for what they are. We cannot keep_ in our 
presence the degraded image of the original frame ; and, if some 
memorial is necessary to soothe the unsatisfied want wiiioh we feel 
when bereaved of their presence, it must be found in contemplating 
the place in which we know their dust is hidden. The history of man- 
kind, in all ages, shows that the human heart clings to the grave of its 
disappointed wishes ; that it seeks consolation in rearing emblems and 
monuments, and in collecting images of beauty over the disappearing 
relics of humanity. This can be fitly done, not in the tunuiltuous and 
harassing din of cities, not in the gloomy and almost unapproachable 
vaults of charnel-houses ; but amidst the quiet verdure of the field, 
under the broad and cheerful light of heaven, where the harmonious 
and ever-changing face of nature reminds us, by its resuscitating in- 
fluences, that to die is but to live again.' 

The cpiestion of closing the Granary and King's Chapel 
Burying-grounds is not surrounded with any of the dis- 
agreeable circumstances which have attended like questions 
in the past. It is not pretended that the present condition 
of these grounds renders them dangerous to the pul)lic health. 
Burials are infrequent, and, although it has been shown that, 
under certain conditions, one decomposing body is capable 
of doing much harm, but little danger need be apprehended 
on this account. But, as long as the right of burial is maiu- 

^ Modern Inquiries, Boston, 1867. Boston Pub. Lib., 4407.4. 



30 City Document No. 96. 

tainod the [)ul)lic safety is continually threatened. While 
the contingency is extremely remote, there is a liability that 
burials might become more frequent and the tombs be filled, 
in which case no one would pretend but that the health of 
the city would be endangered. In 1849 the Librarian of the 
Massachusetts Historical Society was compelled to close the 
Avindows overlooking King's Chapel Burying-ground, on 
account of the disagreeable effluvia which arose from the 
graves.^ Since history repeats itself, it is w^ell to guard 
against such an occurrence in the future. Therefore, the 
counnittee believe that, as a prudential measure, it is advis- 
able to close the tombs at the present time. 

The reports of the Board of Health have from time to 
time called attention to the dilapidated and dangerous con- 
dition of the tombs in our burying-grounds, and to the 
liability of accidents from this cause. Owing to the diffi- 
culty of tracing the ownership of such tombs, the expense of 
making necessary repairs has been borne by the city, and 
has amounted to no inconsiderable sum. It has been found 
that the rights of ownership are not apt to I)e very strenuously 
asserted when any expense is to be incurred. Aside from 
the questions of danger and expense, the neglected condition 
of these tombs is discreditable to the city and inconsistent 
with the respect due the dead. 

The o])positi()n to closing the tombs arises chiefly from an 
impression among the proprietors that it is but the first step 
towards removing the remains and using the grounds for 
other purposes. As far as the committee are concerned this 
view of the case has not influenced their judgment in the 
slightest degree. They believe that the historical value of 
these grounds, as mementos of the past history of the city, 
is too great to admit of their obliteration ; that while public 
sentiment would approve of closing the tombs it would not 
sanetion the destructiou of the groinids. Another objection 
is found in the desire of some descendants of the original 
proprietors to Ije Inu'ied with their ancestors. This, although 
a purely sentimental objection, is entitled to respect, for, 
with many, the Avish to be laid after death with those who 
"were dear to them in life, is a feeling too deep and sacred to 
be lightly treated. 

But, in d(!aling with questions concerning the public health, 
objections founded upon sentiment should have no weight. 
Even hereditary rights must conform to the changes which 
time brings about. The hereditary right to be buried in a 
tomb does not include a right to poison the air and endanger 

I Dealings with tho Dead, vol. 1. L. M. Sargout, Boston, 185G. Boston Pub. Lib., 
2406.12. 



Intramural Interments. 31 

the health of the survivors, and, from a purely practical 
stand-point, to insist upon any such right is to display a 
scltish disregard of the public welfare. 

Believing, therefore, that the practice of intramural inter- 
ment is a relic of antiquity, which it is desirable, for many 
reasons, to abolish, the committee respectfully recommend 
the passage of the following order. 

JOSEPH A. TUCKER, 
JOSIAH S. ROBINSON, 
GKORGE T. PERKINS, 
JAMES J. BARRY, 
GEORGE H. WYMAN. 

Ordered, That the Board of Health be directed to grant 
no permit to bury or inter any dead body in either the 
Granary Burying-ground, or the King's Chapel Burying- 
ground, after January 1, 1880. 



APPENDIX. 



ABSTRACT OF THE STATEMENTS BEFOEE THE JOINT 
SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL ON 
THE SUBJECT OF CLOSING JlIE TOMBS IN THE 
KING'S CHAPEL AND GRANARY BURYING-GROUNDS. 

tup: granary burying-ground. 

Tuesday', Jul}- 15, 1879 

The committee met at three o'clock, P.M. 

PRESKXT. — Aklermaii Tucker, Chairman ; Councilmen Perkins, 
Barry. 

W. H. "NVhitmoue called tlie attention of the chairman to the 
fact tliat the names on the list were those of the original grantees 
of the tombs; that the tombs have been transferred from time to 
time, and b}- reading the nanjes on tlie printed list the cliairman 
would be apt to mislead some of those present. 

Geo. "\Vm. Piiillips suggested that those present be heard ; and 
if the}- could satisfy the committee that no tombs should be closed, 
that Avill settle the decision of the whole. There are two hundred 
and four tombs. Some one who is away might be willing to have 
his tomb shut ; and anotlier, for a satisfactor}' reason, would pre- 
fer to let his remain open. He desired the inquiry to be a general 
one. 

The CiiAiiniAN said the statute required that if an}- parties 
present represent any particular tomb, that number should be 
taken up ; and it is not necessary to go through the whole list. 

James M. English, representing tomb No. 1, on belialf of 
himself and Dr. Ik'thune, grandson of the gentleman who l)uilt the 
tomb, objected to its being closed. They had taken care of it for a 
number of years. They expect and desire to be buried there. 
They inherited it from the builder. It has been abandoned by all 
the other heirs ; and the present owners cannot conceive of any 
public necessity for closing that tomb. There has not been an 
interment in it for ten years. 

In reply to (piestions I)}- Mr. "NVhitmore, Mr. English said he 
could not state by what title the tomb is held at present. All the 
other descendants had abandoned the tomb to Dr. Bethune and 
himself. There are many otlier persons in the country belonging 
to the family. He presumed the tomb was held by family inlieri- 
tance. The city passed an ordinance some years ago, and at- 
tempted to prevent interments there. He anil his sister and Dr. 
Bethune made an application to the court, in tlie nature of an 
ap[)eal, but before it came to trial the order was repealed. 



Appendix, 33 

In repW to questions hy Mr. Perkins, Mr. English said all but 
two of the famil}' had abandoned it; that not long ago it liad been 
cleaned out, and everything put in order, for whieh tliey paid the 
undertaker. Everything offensive was removed ; the skeletons 
were put into boxes, and properl}- marked. Dr. Bethune and 
himself had looked after it for the past twenty years. Should 
think tliere had been no interments there for about fourteen yeai's. 
John Bethune was put into the Faneuil tomb about fourteen ^ears 
ago. The tomb is at present in perfect order. It is an old family 
tomb ; his ancestors had been buried there, and he should like to 
lie with them unless it is injurious to the health of the city ; and h 
it is the owners wdll submit. It is supposed by persons interested 
in the tombs that the ultimate object is to use that ground for 
other purposes; and if the use of the tombs can be prevented all 
their value is gone, and the cit\- may take it for any public use, 
without being obliged to make compensation. He did not think 
there is any foundation for that, because it struck him as scandal- 
ous to suppose that the cit}- would get possession of the ground 
for nothing, to prevent its use b}- the present owners when that use 
is not injurious to the public health. 

George W. Phillips, representing tomb No. 60, appeared and 
objected to its being closed. In it are buried his father, the first 
nia3'or of Boston, his wife, and nearly all of his children, and the 
wife and children of himself. In 18.33 a movement similar to tiiis 
was made, and Dr. John C. AVarren, a high authorit}' on sanitary 
matters, who lived on Park street, headed the remonstrances, and 
scouted the idea that there was anything unhealthy in continuing 
burials there, and who, rather than have the graveyard closed, 
would be willing to have another in front of his house. Mr. 
Phillips had looked through the records of the past few years, and 
found that from 1873 to 1879 there have been only fourteen inter- 
nments ; in 1873, seven ; in 1874, two ; in 1875, one ; in 1876, four ; 
in 1<S77, four; and in 1878, two. If this were a nuisance tlie 
Tremont House, with its broadside toward that graveyard, would 
have been heard from a hundred times ; the residents of Park 
street would have been here. He had lived near the Athenaeum 
many years, and never heard a word against the burial-ground as 
being mischievous. It does not average three burials a j'ear. In 
the earl}- histoiy of the town these tombs were laid out, and by 
actual grant the owners had given them an easement, and the 
right to bury in that yard. The ground is used for the purposes for 
which it was granted. The tombs are worth from fift}' to two hundred 
dollars each, and the city will hear from it if the closing is finally 
decreed. Every man has an attachment for the burial-place of liis 
kindred. He desired to be buried where his kindred were laid. 
The new blood that comes down to Boston from New Hampshire 
and Vermont brings many people who do not appreciate this 
feeling. Here are a few tombs opened twice a year to receive the 
remains of those on that long list who ask to be buried there. 
Ten to fifteen years, at the farthest, will close the list. Wliat he 
said is not a mere sentiment, but a regard for that feeling which 
is imbedded in every man's heart, that the burial-place of his 



34 City Docuiment Xo. 96 

ancestry shall l)e respected. He asked the New Hampshire and 
Maine men to decide ni)()n this thinij; just as the}- would upon the 
breaking up of their own buri:il-places. He did not believe they 
are prejudicial to public health. \i' so, wh}' has it not l»een heard 
from before? If they are a nuisance the Board of Health is bound 
to come forward and show it before the hearing was opened. The 
fact that in this dense population no complaint has been heard for 
the last twenty years calls for some justification more than has 
been hinted at. St. Paul's Church is opened a hundred times to 
the Granary ground once ; and yet nobody has ever suggested that 
that was an unhealthy use of the ground. Tomb No. 60 has been 
opened thii teen times in sixty-four years, and may be opened three 
or four times more. Uidess the committee see reasons other than 
those named they should allow it to be used a few years longer. 

'My. Whitmoke called attention to the legislation expressly pro- 
hil)iting I)urials under St. Paul's Church ; and more than that all the 
remains are to be removed, which is more than has been suggested 
in regaid to the Granary Burial-gronnd. He desired to know of 
Mr. Phillips, whether the large number of occupants who paid 
nothing for the tombs had any claim for damages in case they are 
closed. He asked this, because he knew that a great many of the 
tombs are not in the possession of the descendants of the persons 
who received the grants, and that no regard was paid to the 
feelings of the original owners. At the time of the Revolution a 
number of the loyalist fanulies owning the tombs in various city 
grounds were exactly in the position of Mr. Phillips at present ; 
the tombs were not only confiscated, but the contents were thrown 
out, and other persons received the tomb as a free gift. Governor 
Hutchinson's tond) was despoiled, and was occupied by others, — a 
well-known historical fact. There are others who desire to be 
bulled in the city with their relatives, and why is there any par- 
ticular reason why the owners of tombs are to have their feelings 
in that respect, if contrary to the p»]l)lic interests, any more con- 
sidered than those who arc buried in graves? Yet in 1796 the 
town forbade further interments in the graves, and none have taken 
place in the city since. It is a great hardship to prevent a person 
from depositing his remains with those of his i-elatives ; but it is 
no greater to those who own tombs than to those who expect to be 
burk'd in graves. Since the laying out of Mt. Auburn many per- 
sons preferied having the remains of their friends translerred from 
the cilv yards to the new tombs a)ul graves in Mt. Auburn. But 
the question he desired Mr. Phillips to explain is in regard to the 
pecuniary interest of those who claim rights in the tond)s. 

Mr. PiiiLMPS. It is a mere bagatelle. I shall not claim any 
damages. But can anything be clearer that a man who has a 
right of burial in a certain spot has a i>ecuniary interest? Mr. 
Whitmore has been in Judge Paine's oJIice long enough to know 
that a man who squats on a place has a title to his position. The 
town having given them the right, for which they paid, how 
is it possible to say it is not property, for which the constitution 
irives an indemnity? He did not understand the Hutchinson case, 
as presented by Mr. Whitmore, to be correct. The Board of 



Appendix. 35 

Health cannot sa}' that opening the ground four times a year can 
injure the public health, and it is absurd nonsense to talk about it. 
Think of the cesspools and open vaults wliich have liad no pro- 
tection for 3-ears ; and here they come squalling about three inter- 
ments a jear 

Frank W. Bigelow, representing tomb No. 70, objected to 
the closing of the tomb. Hon. Tlioraas Hubbard was the original 
owner, and it was inlierited from him. There have been no inter- 
ments since 1874 ; it is in thorough repair, and not a nuisance. 
He had it repaired himself, and stopped up with suitable flag-stones ; 
it is covered up to a depth of three feet. He did not think his fam- 
ily would use it, but tliey are certainl_v not willing that the rights 
granted by the town of Boston should be taken awa}-. 

Mrs. Carolike M. Shute, representing tomb No. 39, the Capt. 
Thomas Adams tomb, objected to its being closed. It descended 
to her from her father, who inherited it from his grandfather, 
Thomas Adams. She has a fatlier, mother, brothers, and sisters, 
and four children buried there. She has three more children, and 
hopes herself to be buried there. From childhood, she has been 
taught that that is her future home, and would feel very bad indeed 
to know that she is to be deprived of being laid there to rest 
with her relatives. Twenty 3'ears ago it was opened for her 
father, and on the 20th of last February for her child, — the 
only interments in twenty years. There are only four more to 
go into that tomb. She had a letter from Col. Staples, who has a 
right in the tomb, and decidedly objects to its being closed. She 
had no other home to go to when she dies. It ma}- be years, and 
it may be a very little while ; but she hoped to go where her father, 
mother, and children are laid. It has always been kept in repair; 
there is nothing about it which can be considered a nuisance. 
Nobod}' can bear the idea of being separated from relatives ; we 
all want to go to one place ; those who have nice places outside 
can go there. She had no home to go to except this. She hoped 
the committee would think how hard it will be to be separated 
from a father and mother in that home. Her father taught her, 
from a little bit of a girl, that she was to go there when she died. 
The idea that it is goiug to be closed up, and that right taken 
awa}" from her, had grown upon her so that she could hardly sleep. 
She wanted to be put there, and have the rest of her children put 
there. 

L. H. "Bean, representing tomb No, 3, objected. It is one of 
the original tombs granted, by the town of Boston, to his ances- 
tors and others, provided they built the tombs satistactorj' to the 
town and maintained them for purposes of burial, and so long as 
they maintained them in good order they were to have the use of 
them. It descended to him from the original owner, in 1721. He 
had had the custody of the tomb for forty-five years, — had kept 
it in repair. It had been cleaned and whitewashed, and there is 
nothing about it detrimental to the public health. It is many 
years since it was last opened. But three persons will probably 
request to be interred there, and it may be that circumstances will 
be such that they will not. His immediate family have been 



36 City Document No. 96. 

removed to Forest Hills, but this is kept as the famil}- tomb ; he 
l)rotestod against his rights being taken away. Tlie tomb is 
directl}' in tlie rear of the house formerly occupied by Hon. Abbott 
Lawrence. A large window opens directl}' upon the grounds. 
He had never heard any complaint from the famih', or from the 
Union Club, as to its being a nuisance. When the hearing took 
place, some years ago, on the intention of the city to close the 
tombs, Dr. Warren, residing on Park street, Dr. Gardner, and all 
the gentlemen on that street, joined in testifying that they never 
considered it a nuisance. They did complain that one or two of 
the tombs had gone into the hands of speculators, and were 
opened oftener than they ought to be. Where they are used for 
family pur|)oses he could not see an}' objection. The last inter- 
ment there was ten years ago, and the one previous to that was 
six years before. All his ancestors, from the time of the Revolu- 
tion, with the exce[)tion of his own famih', are buried there. He 
protested against any infringement of his right to use it for family 
purposes. He did not intend to be buried there himself, nor to 
liave his children buried tiiere. 

Mr. Bean also spoke in regard to the Thomas W. Sumner tomb. 
No, 99, The only three persons who will ever be placed in it are 
very aged. — one over ninety-five, and another about seventy-eight ; 
the}' reside in New Bedford. The tomb was opened a number of 
years ago to bury an army oflicer ; the last interment was three 
years ago, when it was covered witli tlag-stones and sealed with 
cement. It is nearly opposite the Tremont House, well up in the 
vard, and it would be impossible for any eflhivia to escape from it ; 
besides, it would be very ditiicult to get it open, 

RoBKKT Trkat Paine, 8r,, lepresenting tomb No. 88, objected 
to its being closed. He is the grandson of the man to whom it was 
granted. — to him and his heirs forever. He inherited it from 
hisgrandfatlier who died in 1814. He was at his house on the pre- 
vious thanksgiving day ; all the family were there, and of all those 
[)rcsent none are now living but himself, and he had been hoping 
to be buried there with them. Mr. Paine also represented No. 
14.S, Ix'longing to the ftxther of his wife, who opposes any change. 
The stone is covered four feet deep, and he could not believe there 
are any injurious exiialations from it. 

Alijeut Paukek Simpson objecteil to the closing of No. 117, en- 
dorsing what had been said. It had belonged in the family ever 
since the original gr:\nt, and had always been intended to be used 
by those now living. It is in tiie rear of the yard, about in the 
middle. One interment was mnde the first part of this year. Per- 
haps there are three or four more to be buried tliere. In the last 
fifteen years there have been but five l)uri:ds. He and all the par- 
ties likely to be buried there are residents of Boston. Should 
think there were perhaps a dozen or fifteen bodies in the tomb. 

F^BENK/.Eit Gay appeared for tomb No. 124, built in 1772 by his 
grandfatliei'. The last burial was two or three years ago. Buri- 
als have occurred there in the last sixty years, and some bodies 
have been recently removed to Forest Hills, His grandfather was 
buried in 1809. He endorsed what Mr. Phillips and Mr. English 



Appendix. 37 

had said as general considerations. He had no other bnrying-place 
for himself and family. If the scope of this inquiry is limited to 
the sanitary use of the grounds, he hoped the committee would 
give time for the remonstrants to present reasons and opinions of 
judges and experts. He thought it could be shown that as a sani- 
tary measure the tombs need not be closed. 

Mrs. Emily A. Bell, representing tomb No. 164, said it is in 
good condition and has alwaj's been attended to. It is in the 
arena back of the monument. It was opened about two 3'earsago, 
and there are about half a dozen more who claim a privilege there. 
There are onl\' a few bodies there belonging to her family. There 
are six more to use it. 

John B. Osborn, representing tomb No. 91. said he adopted 
the sentiments of the gentlemen who had spoken, and protested 
against closing the tomb. 

Henry F. Jenks, representing tomb No. 177, said it was put 
down in the name of Fitch & Freeman ; but he thought the Free- 
mans had sold their part to his grandfather. Probably onl}' one 
person more in the family- will be buried there. There has been 
no burial for fourteen or fifteen ^-ears. He objected to the tomb 
being closed. He would be likel}' to remove the bodies if the tomb 
was closed. If any tombs are left open he wanted the same privi- 
lege. 

Andrew Geer appeared for tomb No. 72, in the name of John 
Endicott. His family- had had a right of burial there as far back as 
1830 down to within twelve jcars. His sister and himself are the 
only two remaining of the family. It has not been opened foi; 
twelve years ; it cannot be much of a nuisance, and he protested 
against having it closed. His father, mother, brothers, and sisters 
are buried there, and perhaps he might want to go in there some 
da}' himself. The last interment was made twelve 3ears ago. In 
1860 his mother was buried there ; in 1856 or '57 his sister, and in 
1840 his father. He didn't think it had been opened for an}- other 
parties except his famil}- for forty years. 

Miss Mary C. Oliver, for tomb No. 26, objected to its being- 
closed. Her parents and brother are buried there, and she wanted 
the same right if she chose to exercise it. 

The committee received a request from Messrs. Phillips, English, 
and others representing various tombs, for a further hearing, that 
the}' mav offer evidence on the general question. 

Adjourned to Thursday, July 31, at two o'clock, P.M. 



THE SECOND HEARING. 

Thursday, July 31, 1879. 

The committee met at two, P.M. 

Present. — Alderman Tucker, Chairman ; Councilmen Perkins, 
Wyman, and Bariy. 

James H. Munroe, representing tomb No. 113, said there had 
been only two interments in it for the last fifteen years. Tho 



38 City Document No. 96. 

name Ilavden is down for this nunibor ; but he did not know wliat 
interest that man has. The interment previous to the one men- 
tioned was seven ^-ears before, and the previous one was twent}- 
years earlier. He examined the tomb thoroughh' in 1871 ; it 
was as perfect as when built in 1810. There is nothing detri- 
mental to health in it. He strongly opposed its being closed, and 
endorsed the sentiments of Mr. Phillips and the other remon- 
strants at the last meeting. He objected on the ground that these 
tombs and monuments should be presei'ved. If another satisfac- 
tory place was given him he might not object individually, but 
could not speak for the other owners who have other places of 
interment. 

Thomas C. Amort objected to closing tomb No. 78. He had 
ancestors buried in it, where they have rested quietly for a hun- 
dred years, and he hoped would be permitted to rest many liun- 
dred years longer. Though we have the glorious Common and 
this burying-ground, we have not too many places for breathing 
and elbow-room in the heart of the city. We have half a million 
people, more or less ; are bound to have a million and a half in the 
future, and it is very desirable to keep as much open land in the 
centre of the city as possible. On that ground, if no other, he 
trusted there will be no disposition to disturb the tombs. One of 
the tombs he was interested in, Avhere his ancestor lies, was 
given by the city for public services during the Revolution, after he 
came to take up his abode in Boston. From fifty to sixty of his 
ancestors are buried there, and within ten years the speaker had 
followed a hearse to that tomb with one of his relatives to be 
buried. As a general rule the tombs are ver}- rarely used except 
for guarding the ashes of the dead, and in that burying-ground are 
deposited the remains of a very large number of the historical per- 
sonages in whom we take most pride, whose memories we are 
bound to cherish, and on whose tombstones should have been in- 
scribed what Shakespeare put upon his own, " Accursed be he w^io 
removes these bones." It would be a most sacrilegious act and en- 
tail endless disgrace upon Boston if they and their descendants 
should be removed for the sake of any private, immediate, or fu- 
ture profit, or from a dis[)osition to violate the tombs. The whole 
community shuddered wlion it was proposed to place a court-iionse 
there, and it was contrary to the wishes and taste of the public to 
put it to any such purpose. He had a burial-place at St. Paul's, 
and trusted there would be some hesitatiou about carrying out the 
disposition to close up tlie tombs there. If a time should ever 
come when a public opinion would be generated so as not onl}' to 
close \\[) these tombs, but appropriate them under the right of emi- 
nent domain for an\' sanitar\- purpose, or public use, w^hen the 
time came for making compensation, the present actual use would 
be an important element in the amount to be paid by the city for 
what was taken. It will be an injury in advance and an indirect 
violation of the constitutional safeguard, that no man's property 
should be taken without compensation, by lessening the value of 
the present use of the tomb. If you take away the present use 
you ought to pay for the privilege. If you close it up b}- the right 



Appendix. 39 

of eminent domain, when the whole privilege is taken, and the 
Granary Burial-ground applied for sonie other purpose, then the 
whole expense of placing it in some position, — into a place 
equally agreeable, — the city would omit the element of present 
use in computing the value. He objected to separating the present 
use from the pi'operty in the tomb itself. It would be difficult for 
the city to settle upon the amount of damages. Finding a resting- 
place somewhere else would be perhaps a very serious matter. 
Many people of ver}- limited means have struggled along until 
they are threescore 3ears and ten, who are looking forward with 
groat satisfaction to their final rest in tliose tombs with those the}' 
love. If this is taken away tlie families are so scattered there 
would be much trouble to find another place of interment. Burial- 
grounds have been in existence in London and Rome some two 
thousand j-ears, and there has always been a disposition every- 
where to respect the sanctities of the tomb. 

Mr. Georgk W. Phillips obtained permission to introduce a 
few witnesses upon the general question of the effect of the tombs 
upon public health. 

H. C. Brooks, residing at the Tremont House for sixteen to eigh- 
teen years, occupying a room on the south side next the burying- 
ground, had never heard any complaintof injurious eflTect from burials 
on that ground, and had never perceived any bad effect himself. 

Mr. Phillips read a letter from Hon. Alpheus Hardy, trustee 
of and boarder at the Tremont House, and familiar with it for 
twenty-five 3'eai*s, stating that he never had had a complaint of the 
burial-ground or heard of one from an}' source. If there had been 
cause for complaint he should have known of it. 

Lewis P. Jones, undertaker, and sexton of St. Paul's Church, 
had never heard any complaint from burials in the city grounds 
during thirty-five jears. Dr. Warren, who lived on Park street, 
told him he considered the light and air from the burial-ground 
one of the greatest things he could have for the estate. Most of 
the tombs used for the last thirtj* 3'ears are covered b}' stones, the 
planks having been taken awa}'. He lived thirtN'-five years in the 
rear of St. Paul's Church ; never saw a sick day since he has been 
in Boston. His wife had not been well for some years ; but her 
family, who never lived there, were much the same as she was. 
He was in the St. Paul's Church tombs about a third of the time 
for thirt\' years, and never experienced an}' bad effect from efflu- 
via. Mr. Jones told one or two anecdotes to show the supersti- 
tious fear people have of dead bodies. The Granary Burying- 
ground is in good condition ; once in a while a place is found 
where the boards are rotten, and in many cases the boards are re- 
placed with stones. He was in the ground yesterday, and saw no 
tombs except what were in perfect condition. He had two children, 
and they had always been in good health. 

Richard Sullivan, owner of one-half of tomb 146, had a grent 
many friends buried there, and objected to the right of burial being 
taken away. It was last opened about ten years ago ; was in good 
condition then : had heard no complaint. He would prefer a burial- 
place there to one at Mt. Auburu. 



40 City Documknt No. 9C>. 

Henry G. Denny, ropresenting one-half of toml) No. 111. built 
by Obadiah Wriglit, appeared for tl)e i)resent owner, jNIiss Caroline 
AVright, who objected to the tomb being closed. The last inter- 
ment was in 1S44. Miss Wright would consider it a case of 
peculiar hardship if prevented from having her remains deposited 
in the tomb which her father provided two-thirds of a centurv ago, 
and whicli she has looked forward to occupying for the last thirt}^ 
years. Apart from the considerations of sentiment and associa- 
tion in her case it will be a peculiar hardsliip to be deprived of the 
right of burial there. She has no means of providing a burial- 
place for herself and the other members of the family, and she has 
looked to this as her last resting-place for a long time ; she is 
<lecidedly opposed to being deprived of lier rights in the tomb. 
About a dozen years ago, Mr, Denny lived for a year on Park 
street, and was a frequent visitor at the same house for about 
ten years ; he occui)ied a room opening upon the buiial-ground ; 
never heard anything objectionable or any complaint from that 
house or the neighboring house in regard to the ground, which was 
regarded as an advantage to the estates, as being ornamental, and 
giving additional value to them on account of the rear outlook. 
He never found anything objectionable. 

Keliot Pkttk represented the Faiieuil tomb, No. 138. When it 
was proposed to close the tomb, in 1854, his family secured a lot at 
Mt. Auburn, and one member was buried there. When the restric- 
tion was removed the remains of his relatives were brought into 
Boston, and they sold their lot in Mt. Auburn. His family and the 
Jones famil}' decidedly object to closing the tomb. The last inter- 
ment Avas in 1875. The tomb is in good condition. It is the 
tomb of Peter Faneuil, has his coat of arms upon it, and, ai)art 
from personal objections, it is historical ground and should not he 
destroyed. If tjje city should agree to i)rovide a suitable place he 
would still object to this tomb being closed. He thought there 
were four of each family likely to be buried there. 

James L. Wil.son, a part owner of tomb No. 174, known as the 
Gray and Wilson tomb, said it came into the hands of Robert Gray 
fifty years ago, and into the hands of Mrs. Wilson, his wife, who is 
present. Her great-grandiiither, all her ancestors, and her children, 
are buried there. She is naturally very sensitive against this 
movement to deprive her of her rights. The last buiial was that 
f)f her father about fourteen years ago. Her father had cared for 
it foi'ty years before his decease at eighty-one years of age, since 
which time the speaker had had the care of it. It is in good re- 
pair and always has been. He luul lived within a short distance 
of it in Montgomery place, and never heard any com[)laints 
against it. He never heard of anybody dying at the Tremont 
House except from extreme old age. The same may be said of 
other ])laces in the vicinity. It is one of the healthiest neighbor- 
hoods in the city. 

W. K. Ghay, representing tonil) No. 1G2, asked if there would 
be any objection to allowing the bodies to be removed if the tombs 
are closed ; to wliich the chairman replied that he was under the 
impression there never had been any ol)jections to removing the 



Appendix. 41 

remains from any of the tombs. If the tombs are merely to be 
closed and the grounds remain open, with rights of the owners 
protected, Mr. Gra^' said he should not object ; otherwise he would. 

Charles Hobbart objected to closing tomb No. 15S, on the 
ground that he had no where else to burj^ the dead. The tomb is 
in good condition. It was last opened about thirty-two years ago. 
He was in the tomb some time last spring. There was something 
said about taking the burial-ground for pu]>lic purposes, and he 
thouglit he would not do an}' more repairs until he found out what 
was going to be the result. If tlie majority of the owners decided 
to give the city that piece of ground for speculation, he would de- 
cide with them. Most of the heirs of this tomb, about twenty in 
his famil}', who will take care of it, are all young people. He did 
not propose to give the City of Boston an inch of ground. The 
city cannot make a nuisance of it. The whole thing could be 
taken care of for a little money if the owners w^ere a mind to put 
their heads together. He had never lost any of his family and 
hoped he never should. At the same time the right in the tomb 
comes handy, and will save a few dollars, for it costs a good deal 
to bur}' a body nowadaj's. It is considerable honor to own a 
burial-place in the Granary burial-ground. It is an historical place, 
and ouglit to be fenced up more than it is now. If it had a higher 
fence it would keep the corporations and peanut-stands away from 
it. He went all over the ground last spring and found only one 
place where the rats were getting in at the top of the tomb. 

Frank W. Bigelow said that within thirty years there had been 
nearly a hundred dollars spent on the two tombs he represented, 
he having expended sixty odd dollars on the one in the Chapel- 
ground. He objected to closing the tomb even if another place 
was provided. 

Mr. Phillips addressed the committee on the general question 
of tlie expedienc}' of closing the tombs. He quoted the statute 
authorizing the proceedings, and admitted that if the tombs can 
be shown to be. a nuisance, no matter whose ancestors are buried 
there, they should be closed. The Board of Health have simply 
reported that the public health requires that future interments in 
each and all the tombs of the Granary Burying-ground should be 
prohibited. They presented this without a single reason except 
tlieir own statement. What right have they to say that all the 
tombs, from 1 to 204, need to have this prohibition put upon them? 
How can the committee say that tomb No. 1 comes within that 
category ? It contains a box and some dry skeletons. Are they 
going to accept the sweeping charge, when the evidence is plain 
that it mM}' as well never have been occupied? In his own case 
the tomb has not been opened for sixteen 3'ears, and in sixty years 
but about twelve times. It is covered with flagging, and about 
three feet of loam. Nothing is more impervious to noxious 
gases than loam, and yet the Board of Health sa}' it is noxious. 
Mr. Philli[)s quoted from the reports of the Board of Health from 
187o to 1878, to show that, with the exception of once, they have 
never used the word " sanitary" in regard to closing these tombs, 
having all the while urged it upon the ground that it is expensive, 



42 City Document No. 9(j. 

having put it in black and white that the h\n(l is worth over a 
million dollars, and could be used as a court-house. It would 
seem that when they found they could not get rid of it in that 
way, they make this charge. Upon the case presented, there is no 
evidence by which the committee can report to the government 
that the tombs are unfit for future interment, Mr. Phillips stated 
that he appeared also for tomb No, •60, No. 157, No. 96, and No. 
107^, The statute requires the committee to report that the 
specific numbers referred to are nuisances, and he claimed there 
was nothing in the evidence authorizing them to make such a 
report. 

George Allen, owner of tomb No. 12, said it had not been 
opened for twenty years, no more interments are intended to be 
made there, and while it is not his intention to open it again, he 
did not wish to dispose of it. He had no objection to having it 
permanently sealed, 

Wilson J. Welch, representing tomb No. 144, remonstrated 
against its being closed unless it is proved to be unhealthy to the 
cit}' ; or if the city will provide such a place as they would choose, 
the owners would not object. lie would prefer that the city would 
give them the money for the value of the tomb, and let them go 
to Forest Hills or somewhere else, and provide a place for them- 
selves. The tomb was in i)erfect order in 1839, and has never 
been opened since. 

The chairman filed the following letter with the papers in the 
case : — 

MaCHIAS, WASUINCiTOX CoUNTY, MaINE, 

July 28, 1879. 

Messrs. Tucker, Barry, and Perkins, Joint Special Committee of the City 
Council on the Granary Burying-groiuid : — 

Gents, — I see by the proceeding before you on tlie 15th, that Mrs. Caroline 
M. Shute represented tomb No. :50, owned by Cajjt. Tlionias Adams. Her 
father was tlie son of Jacob Kust, who married Mary Adams, daugbter of 
Capt. Thomas Adams. My father, f'apt. Edward Staples, married Diana 
Adams, also a dauiihter of Capt. Tliomas Adams. The Kust family and the 
Staples family being the only owners of the Capt. Thomas Adams tond), No. 
39, Granary IJurying-ground, on Tremont street, in tlie City of Boston. Upon 
the reeonnnendation of the Board of Health, you propose to prohibit any 
further interments in said Granary Burying-ground. I protest against the 
closing of the tomb which I rejjresent, on the ground that it is a nuisance. This 
tond) has been opened only four times in the last seventy years (70) ; in 1809, 
1819, 1S22, and l.s41, for my father, mother, and two brothers. 1 have a 
brother buried in Philadelphia, and two sisters in Belvidere, Illinois. I am 
the only one of my fathers family living, and I have passed my seventy-fiftl\ 
year (7.5). I was born in the City of Boston; my father lived at 83 Prince 
street, and done business on Long Wharf, and I desire to be buried in the 
city where I was born. I have one daughter who desires to be buried in the 
tend) in Boston, and the remains of my wife who dit'd since I lived there, I in- 
tend to remove to Boston, tomb No. 159, Grannry IJurying-ground. I had 
three daughters, one married here, and her husband and children are buried 
here, and she probably will be. One of my daughters married Otis N. Jones, 
of Boston, son of Eliphalet Jones; died, and was buried at Mt. .Auburn. 

I protest against the closing the Granary Burying-ground against any further 
interments. I don't believe the Board of Health or the authorities of the City 
of Boston, or State of Massachusetts, have the right to deprive me of my 



Appendix. 43 

property and resting-place, without making a sufficient compensation for the 
same. I am desirous the burial-place of my father, mother, brothers, uncles, 
and aunts, grandfather and grandmother, should be respected. 

I am with respect, your obedient servant, 

THOMAS ADAMS STAPLES. 

This closed the public hearing upon the closing of the tombs in 
the Granaiy Burying-ground. 

The chairman called upon the members of the Board of Health, 
and Mr. Keith said the closing of the tombs was no new thing, 
having been mentioned in the reports ever}' year since the Board 
had been in existence, and mention had also been made of burial- 
grounds at other places in the heart of the city proper. Some 
of the tombs in this Granary- Bur^nng-ground are in such a di- 
lapidated condition that men employed to cut the grass around 
them have in some instances fallen into them and disappeared 
out of sight. In two instances the men were so frightened that 
the}- refused to go back there to work. Most of the tombs have 
been opened by the frost and rain, and are in such an exposed con- 
dition that if a bodj- were deposited there the gases would come 
out without any let or hindrance. Ever}' one knows the difficulty of 
confining such gases. Ever since the organization of the Board 
of Health, whether under the city or town government, it has called 
the attention of the public to the closing of those burial-grounds 
in the heart of the city. In 1795 the selectmen voted that no 
graves or new tombs shall be opened or built in either the Common 
or Chapel Burying-grounds after the 1st day of May next then 
ensuing. No new graves have been opened since that time. The 
City of Boston then only had a population of eighteen thousand. 
He inferred that the selectmen would have closed the tombs had 
the}' the power to do it. Sanitarians agree that burials in tpmbs 
are infinitely more unhealthy than in the grcjund, where the body is 
covered with earth which will absorb the gases. There has not 
been sufficient authority in the law to prevent burials in the tombs 
until the Legislature of 1877 amended the law in a way that it 
could be acted upon, saying the City Council should have power 
to do so after the Board of Health recommend that future inter- 
ments should cease. As to the condition of the tombs, he knew 
of one near the Tremont House where the coffins are wedged in 
edgeways and are sticking up upon the steps of the tomb. The 
frost often causes them to give way before tlie authorities are 
aware of it, and, as was the case at the burying-ground on Eustis 
street, the first they knew the dogs and cats were bringing out the 
bones and playing with them upon the ground. All the tombs are 
in such an open, cracked condition that the gases will escape very 
easily. The law does not contemplate that the Board shall prove 
the tombs are actually in a state of nuisance. The law is to pre- 
vent the arising of a nuisance. The Board recommend that future 
interments shall cease l)ecause the condition of the tombs is such 
that a nuisance must arise. If a rat or mouse dies within the walls 
of a house the stench becomes so great you cannot live there. 
The human body is no sweeter than that of a rat. It is all flesh. 



44 City Document No. 9G. 

In the process of decay the human body is no sweeter than that of 
any aiiinial upon the earth's surface. Just so much more otten- 
sive will a human body be as it is hirger, and tlie gases will exhale 
in the same proportion. The stench from that burial-ground has 
been such that members of the Board of Health, whose oIHce has 
been next to the ground, have been sick ever since its organization. 
Mr. Whiting, Mr. Crowell, Mr. Boardman, the clerk of the Board, 
and the clerk in the rear oflice, were all made sick b}' it. I have 
gone to the office feeling perfectly well, and in ten minutes my 
head would turn round so that I would have to go back into the 
open air. This is caused by the gases from that burial-ground. Mr. 
J. P. Bradlee, for several years President of the Board of Directors 
for Public Institutions, occui)ied the room Ave did, and was made 
sick in the same way, and he told the Board he could not stand 
it. The janitors say that when the}' come in in the morning the 
stench is fearful, often so they cannot stand it, and they have to 
open the doors and windows and go out. They say there have 
been only a dozen burials in the King's Chapel burial-ground 
latel}'. So much the worse. A few burials, and we have had this 
experience. The water permeates through those tombs, runs into 
tlie basement of the building and fills the whole space under- 
neath. 

The statute does not contemplate waiting until a case of pesti- 
lence arises befoie we can sto]) it. It is a remedial, preventive 
process. You are to anticipate the effect of these gases and pre- 
vent diseases fnmi arising in consequence of them. Sickness and 
disease have arisen repeatedly, as we are able to show, and I could 
take up considerable of your time in doing so, if I deemed it 
essential. The contemplation of the statute is to stoj) this thing 
in the future. If our selectmen in 1795 saw the evil from this 
place to the extent that the}' said no more interments should be 
made there if they had the power to control it, how much more a 
necessity is it when we have a population of three hundred and 
fifty thousand, and the evil is growing worse every day. The only 
plea they make is that our ancestors are buried there, and they 
want to be buried there too. That is a matter of sentiment which 
would be taken out of these people if they would look into the 
tomljs and see how the remains of their ancestors appear. I do 
not believe one-half of them would allow themselves to be buried 
there. 

These people })rofess to have much respect for their ancestors ; 
but when we tried to find some one to repair a tomb we could not, 
and have had to repair it at the expense of the city ; and subse- 
quentl}-, when a man with a right in the tomb turned up and we 
presented tlie l)ill, he would say, I don't know as I have such an 
interest in it tiiat I care to paj* such a bill. The community is not 
called upon to bear the offensive smell of decaying bodies sim[)ly 
because the ancestors of these people are buried there. 

The C'liAiKMAN. — A great many of these people want the city 
to provide them with a place of burial somewhere else. How is 
the statute on that point? 

Mr. Ki:iTii. — Nothing is said about that, one way or the other. 



Appendix. 45 

It is undoubtecll}- witliin the discretion of the cit}' to do as it 
pleases. One thing ma}- be said, the riglits which these people 
have, never cost them anj'tliing, but descended from their ances- 
tors. If the city took possession of the grounds and used them 
for another purpose, then I should think it would be called upon 
to make suitable remuneration for them. But if it siin[)ly orders 
the tombs closed, then I do not see wli^- it should make remuner- 
ation. The statute simply coutemplutes closing the tombs. 

Mr. Wyman. — Who has the ownership in tiiese lands? 

Mr. Keith. — I cannot tell whether it originally belonged to 
the town, or not. M3' impression is it belouged to the town, which 
was in the habit of grantiug permits to use the tombs ; but that 
implied that the ownership of the fee vested in the town. 

Mr. Wyman. — If these places are closed up, will the land 
revert to any one else, as in the case of a street, when it is aban- 
doned !)}• the cit\" the land reverts to the original ownei's ? 

Mr. Keith. — That is where the vote was originally to take the 
land for a street. The difference between the two cases is this : 
when land is taken for a street, it is used for street purposes, and 
when its use as a street is given up, it reverts to the original pos- 
sessors. But in this case the town originally owned the laud, it 
voted to give not the land, but an easement in it for purposes of 
burial. If the title comes into an^'body's hands, I think it will 
be the cit^' of Boston. 

Mr. Barry. — Suppose the city should stop burials tiiere, it 
would not have the right to use the land for any other purpose, 
except by getting an Act of the Legislature. 

Mr. Keith. — That is my idea at present. The present statute 
enables the cit}- to close the tombs so that they shall not be used 
in the futui-e. 

Mr. Wyman. — I am informed that if they are closed, the abut- 
ting owners will claim that the land reverts to thern. 

Mr. Keith. — That question should be referred to the Cit}' Solic- 
itor. I have no idea that the claim is well-founded. M3- own idea 
is that the land originally belonged to the town. 

Mr. Barry. — The Board of Health says that all the tombs are 
in bad condition. Suppose there are some in good condition, 
would the cit}' have a right to close them? 

Mr. Keith. — You will see by the statute that we have not got 
to show that a tomb is in bad condition : " The City Council of 
an}- city ma}', upon the report of the Board of Health thereof that 
the public health requires it, and after public notice and hearing 
in the manner hereinafter provided, forbid future interments in 
any tomb or tombs in the city." The Board of Health report 
that the public health requires that future interments in these 
tombs should be prohibited. They do not have to show that a 
particular tomb is in a dilapidated condition. 

Dr. DuRGiN. — We worked nearly two years under the old law 
with the hope of notifying the proprietors, and then taking the 
step which we have now taken to close those tombs. We found 
it utterly imitossible to do so. We employed a man for a year or 
more to look up these very records, and see if it were possible to 



46 City Document No. 96. 

notify the proprietors according to the old hiw, which required 
that at least one owner in each tomb should be served with a 
notice. 

The fact that the Board of Health consider the tombs a nuisance, 
and that public health requires they shall be closed, is not of 
recent origin. 

In regard to the stench in the Boaixl of Health office, of which 
Mr. Keith spoke, you can now go down there and see from half a 
dozen to forty of those large blue flies collected in the cracks in 
the walls fiicing that burial-ground, — a condition of things you 
never see except where a stench exists. Tliat is within Ave feet of 
Avhere my desk used to be, and that is the condition of things we are 
obliged to have, when the windows are open. The stench is de- 
cidedly bad ; it has affected my health as it has that of other mem- 
bers of the board. Mr. Phillips made a great point about these 
bodies being buried several feet under the surface of the ground. 
He ought to know that these tombs are the worst possible places 
for the escape of gases ; that you cannot confine them in the tomb. 

In 1843, during an investigation in regard to prohibiting the 
further interment of bodies in cities in Great Britain, it was found 
that gases came iq) from a grave twenty feet deep. Several physi- 
cians stated that live or six feet of earth above the bodies would 
be sufficient to confine the gases ; but it was afterward proved that 
it was not sunicient. The idea that a covering of a few feet of 
earth will confine these gases has been proved to be entireh' erro- 
neous. It is true that a few feet of earth may confine a certain 
degree of animal matter so that you will not perceive it ; but it is 
not true that a large amount of gas can be confined under the same 
depth of earth. We maintain that the soil in King's Chapel and 
Granary Burying-grounds is literally saturated with these bodies. 
Giving to each tomb ten bodies, — and there are forty to fifty in 
some of them, — you will have nearl3' three thousand bodies in 
those two little grounds. You can verj' easily- imagine what con- 
dition the earth is in. The time has long since arrived when 
further interments there should be prohibited. This has been the 
sentiment in all large cities abroad, and decided measures have 
been taken to proliibit further burials within city limits. In re- 
gard to St. Paul's Church, an act has been passed not only pro- 
hibiting further burials under it, but absolutely requiring that the 
bodies now under the church should be carried away. If the city 
is responsible for the care of those grounds, something should be 
done to make their condition safe. On i)ulling away the grass 
alongside one of those tombs, I disclosed a hole some ten inches 
in diameter showing that about three feet of the tomb had 
already settled ; it will soon give in. We have to hire people to 
cut this grass and make those places reasonably' safe. A man cut- 
ting the grass is in danger of going through. 

Mr. KErrii. — If the grounds are closed, and the Board of Health 
have authority to care for them, they will be kept in repair. 

Dr. Gkkkn, Crrv Physician. — I feel very confident that the 
Board of Health cannot urge with too nnich force the necessit}' of 
closing these graveyards. I have as much interest in each of them 



Appendix. 47 

as almost ai^y one. I have ancestors lying in each, and I say, b}' 
all means shut them up. That would be my opinion of what most 
persons would do who have members of their family buried there. 
Natural]}- the persons who feel the least interest in closing them 
are not those who come here to give their opinions to you. Those 
who feel a strong desire not to have the tombs closed come here. 

I cannot tell what will become of the fee of the land, but I have 
an opinion, based upon something I have seen, that these two 
graveyards were originally one. King's Chapel Grave3ard, the old- 
est in the city, was probably a tract in the outskirts of the village, 
and undoubtedly interments were made in a part of it which we now 
call the Granary Burial-ground. Afterwards, when Tremont street 
was laid out, they found a part of the tract of land that had not been 
used for burial, and straightened the street and cari'ied it through, 
making two separate burial-grounds. I have no doubt that at one 
time in the early histoiy of Boston, the two graveyards were 
spoken of as the same, but the street liaving been laid out, they 
have practically become two distinct grounds. 

Mr. Perkins. — Do you think the public health requires this 
measure? 

Dr. Green. — I do, most decidedl3\ I haA-e often noticed what 
Dr. Durgin mentioned, that in the warm part of the year ^'ou can 
see twent}' to one hundred of these large blue flies huddled to- 
gether in the cracks of the walls where the Board of Health was 
located. 

Mr. Perkins. — What is your opinion about the condition of 
the grounds? 

Dr. Green. — The}- are bad indeed. Knowing the}- were bad, I 
was suri)ri.«ed to find them so bad. I did not see a tomb I thought 
in good order. 

Mr. Perkins. — Then, in the short time jou spent there this after- 
noon, you saw that the tombs were in bad condition? 

Dr. Green. — Yes, sir. 

Mr. Barry. — If the city closed the tombs, parties having rights 
in them cannot bring a legal action under the statute? Mr. 
Phillips could not sue the city? 

Mr. Keith. — It is one thing to bring a suit; another thing to 
maintain it. There is no legal ground to maintain a suit, in con- 
sequence of the tombs being closed to burials ; that being done 
under authority of the Legislature. As long as we follow that act 
there is no ground of action for closing the tomb. That is my 
judgment as a lawyer. 

Mr. Perkins. — We made a very careful examination of the 
tombs, and were obliged to mark fourteen bad, twelve very bad, ten 
fair, and two open. 

Adjourned. 



48 City Document Xo. 96. 



KING'S CHAPEL BUEYING-GKOUND. 



FIRST HEARING. 



July 22, 1870. 



The committee met at 2 o'clock, P.M. 

PuESKXT. — Aldermen Tucker, chairman, and Robinson; Couu- 
cilmen Perkins, Barry, and Wyman. 

The clerk read the call, and the report of the Board of Health, 
recommending that further interments in the ground be prohibited ; 
and the chair announced that the committee were prepared to hear 
remonstrances. 

3Iai!Y E. Seaveu, representing tomb Xo. 10, asked if the tombs 
are closed, if the city will furnish a burying-spot elsewhere, she 
not being able to provide another. Her family liave l)een buried 
there. No other heirs claim the tomb except her family. She was 
no relation to the party named in tlie list, James T. Austin, the 
tomb having come to her family from Zachariah Jahonnet, and 
been in their possession about forty yeai's, if not longer. She 
objected to the tomb being closed without she could have a burial- 
spot elsewhere. There are, perhaps, ten or eleven members of the 
family likely- to be buried there. The last burial was Charlotte 
Seaver, an adult, who died three years ago. 

J. G. Bell, representing tomb No. 22, objected to its being 
closed. No interments there to make it detrimental to the public 
health. Do not think one of the family will be buried there, but 
it is the only burial-place they have now. It was live or six years 
since the tomb was opened. The tomb is in thorough repair, and 
has always been kept in good condition. He spoke onh- for him- 
self, Mr. P^dward Bell and Mr. Wm. A. Bowdlear being the other 
owners. There is some mistake about the list representing a party 
by the name of Wells having an interest in this tomb. On tiie old 
plan you will find it marked as the Crafts and Bell tomb. Do not 
think it is detrimental to public health, because there are not inter- 
ments enough to make it so. The swill-carts which go about the 
streets are more detrimental. He expected to be buried at this 
place or in the Granary. Visited this tomb not three days ago. 
It^s near Tremont street, next to the Chapel, on the right-hand 
side, near School street, two or three tombs from the street. 

Wm. Hayden, representing tomb No. 5, in the name of Wm. and 
Edwin Davis, asked what it was propo.sed to do, whether the cit^' 
contemplated removing the remains, or hermetically setding the 
tombs. There is no one connected with his family who would be 
likelv to be interred there, and he did not care to retain it as a place 
of sepulture for himself. He shouM oljject to removing any of the re- 
mains, and wished the tomb closed so it shall never be opened 
again. Tiiere have been no interments there for five or six years. 
His grandfather, Edward Davis, who lived all his life in State 
street, and occupied for fifty years the estate upon which the Tre- 



Appendix. 49 

iiiont bank recently erected a new building, owned the property, 
made a thorough repair of the tomb, and died in 1811, very soon 
after the repairs were made. Mr. Hayden himself had the inte- 
rior arranged some ten or a dozen years ago, and had not heard 
an}' complaint from the tomb. The tomb is on this side of the 
burial-ground, just below the probate office. If the remains are 
left in the tomb he should not object to their- being closed. 

W. Dawes CooLiDGE, representing tomb No. 19, inherited from 
his grandfather, Wm. Dawes, said that when Mr. Pierce was 
Mayor the speaker consulted with those interested in this tomb. 
They left the matter pretty much with him, and he proposed to 
the city some four jears ago that if it would give him a lot in a 
proper location he would not object to closing the tomb. Tliis is 
a natural question which fills the heart of almost ever}' one having 
an interest in the tombs. He proposed to relinquish his right if 
the cit}" would give him another lot as it did his mother, who had 
one on Bo^'lston street and received one at Mt. Auburn from the 
cit}'. The mayor thanked him for the proposal, and said he would 
place it on file. lie would be most happy to unite with the cit}'', 
and supposed that the high-toned honor of Boston would not de- 
prive him of his burial-place without providing him with an- 
other. 

The Chairman. — The committee are not prepared to enter into 
an}' contract of that kind. Their object is to obtain the views and 
feelings of the owners. 

Mr. CooLiDGR. — I should gladly cooperate with the cit}' in any 
wish it may have. There was an interment there about a year 
and a half ago, but it was not in his branch of the family. It was 
an old lady. The tomb had always been in good order. If any- 
thing wrong came to his knowledge about the place where his 
father and mother lie, he would take care of it. The tomb is near the 
south-west corner of City Hall, and would have been covered by 
thirty feet removal of the chapel. He presumed no one has any 
right in the soil. The town never gave any right in the land, but 
simply the right of burial. 

Thomas Minns appeared for tomb No. 9. To see what bearing 
the interments had on the public health he examined the City Reg- 
istrar's office to find the records of the last five years. He found 
that the burials in 1874 were two, in 1875, two, in 1876, one, in 
1877, none, in 1878, four, making nine interments in five years, or 
on an average of one in less than six months. The removals from 
other cities and towns to this burial-ground were, three in 1874, 
two in 1875, one in 1876, none in 1877, one in 1878, making a 
total of seven in five years. Miss Mary Clement, the last surviv- 
ing daughter of the owner of the tomb, thinks it would be an act 
of gross injustice and hardship to deprive her of the right to be laid 
where her parents and sisters are, and where she proposes to be 
laid. The last interment was in 1872. Previous to that there was 
a temporary interment in 1870, and the previous one was in 1865. 
He saw the tomb in 1870, and it was in perfect condition. Miss 
Clement is very old and infirm, her family all lie there, and when 
she dies the race will be extinguished. It is one of those excep- 



/ 



50 City Document No. 96. 

tional cases which ought to be provitlod for. Should think tliere 
are perliaps the remains of twenty persons in the tomb. Think 
tliere are none others of the famih' besides Miss Clement that care 
particularly to use it. 

Faaza r. Bakek, represented tomb No. 26, speaking for Mar- 
garet Hopkins, especiall}'. Iler sister is seventy-five years old, 
feels very bad, and don't want to have the tomb closed. It has 
been open but once in fifteen years, when her mother was buried, 
until last August, when her father died. The undertaker said the 
condition of the tomb was good. Mrs. Nevvcomb, who has an 
interest in No. 26, removed her husband to Woodlawn about a 
month ago, and a brother was temporarily Vmried there last 
August, and afterwards taken to Woodlawn. No smell came up from 
the tomb then. They are all poor; could not get another place, 
and would like to be buried there. Mr. Joseph Clyde owns the 
tomb, and it was her Giandfather Cl^'de who had it built. It is 
right here at the gat(\ with a brown top to it. They would have 
no ol)Jection to the tomb being closed if the city would provide 
them with another place. 

Mrs. Harriet W. Lovering, representing tomb No. 1, said it 
was open a year ago last June ; there are seven bodies in it now. 
The tomb was cleaned in 1864 ; is in excellent condition ; there are 
about seven members of the family who are to be buried there, and 
they are not able to buy another place. They would be willing to 
take another place. 

Clara Wendell also represented tomb No. l,and said only her 
mother and herself were left. Tliey had no objection to closing 
the tomb if another place is provided them. She had often 
thought that if she had the means she should decidedly prefer to 
remove the remains of her father from that place, and would be 
very happy to do so if the city would allow her tiie mone}'. Her 
fatlier, mother, and all her folks were residents of Boston. 

JNIary E. Hathaway, representing tomb No. 4, said that her 
own children, her mother, grandmother, and all her ancestors are 
buried there. Her mother was buried there some ten years ago, 
and her son nine years ago. If the tombs are closed she would 
not remonstrate on her own responsibility. Her aunt had the 
tomb put in good condition nine 3-ears ago, when the last inter- 
ment took place. 

Frank W. Bkieloav, representing tomb No. 11, built by James 
Johnson, in 17H7, said that in 1849, or thereabouts, there was a 
hole in the entrance, and his father had it repaired, and the planks 
replaced with stone. There are only four codins there. Don't 
think there has been an interment since 1814, though there has 
been a temi)orary one. Do not think it is right to disturb the 
tombs if tlicy are not a nuisance, and do not think they are. 
Reside in Weston. Would rather have these places remain just as 
they are. Five generations of his mother's family are buried in the 
King's Chapel Burying-ground. 

Mrs. E. J. Coy said slie had a brother and four sisters in the 
infant's tomb, as well as a grandmother. Have no objection to 
the tomb being closed if another place is provided. 



V 



Appendix. 51 

C. L. RiDGAVAY appeared for tomb No. 20, at the corner of School 
street. He objected to its being closed, even if another place is 
provided. The last interment was tliat of a child, five years ago. 
His family are buried there ; have no other place of interment. If 
the cit}- would give him the best place in Mt. Auburn for his right 
in this tomb, perhaps he would take it. There are as many to be 
buried tliere as the tomb will liold. He did not see any reason for 
shutting the tomb. So far as accepting another place is concerned 
he would say about that as one would about buying a horse — 
should lilvc to see it first. 

P^uwARD R. Broaders appeared as one of the heirs of tomb No. 
34. He had no objection to its being closed, provided the city 
will furnish another suitable place for burial. He agreed with the 
views of Mr. Coolidge. Should think there were eight or ten 
bodies in the tomb. Himself and his brother are the onl}- direct 
descendants that remain. His children are mostly' provided for 
in other places. He should like to be buried there because his 
father, mother, grandfather, and grandmother, and ancestors 
farther back than that are laid there. The tomb has been in the 
family one hundred years. Understand it is in good order. Have 
not seen it for a good man}^ 3'ears. Have been absent for the last 
sixteen 3'ears. Think it was opened about two years ago, to take 
out two persons that had been previousl}' buried there. They 
were buried about six years previous to that. 

Mr. Minns presented a request signed by himself, Mr. Bigelow, 
and others, requesting an adjournment of the hearing to the time 
of the adjourned hearing on the Granar}' Burial-ground, that evi- 
dence ma}- be presented on the question of the effect of burials on 
public health. 

The committee consulted, and the chairman announced that the 
next hearing would be on Thursday, September 4, at two, P.M. 



SECOND HEARING. 

Thursday, Sept. 4, 1879. 

The committee met at two o'clock, P.M. 

Present. — Aldermen Tucker, chairman, and Robinson ; Coun- 
cilmen Perkins, Barr}', and Wyman. 

Thomas Wm. Clarke appeared in behalf of himself and the 
other proprietors of tombs upon the Tremont-street front, espe- 
cially representing tomb 15 originall}- belonging to Samuel Tyley. 
He desired and obtained leave to introduce evidence. 

John Hassam, a conveyancer, in the habit of visiting the reg- 
istry of deeds and probate building very often, nearly every day 
for fifteen or sixteen years, stated in reply to questions b}' Mr. 
Clarke that he had never noticed any offence or nuisance from the 
King's Chapel Burjing-ground. Was present a few days since 
when some of the tombs were opened, stood near them, and did 
not notice any nuisance or offensive odor when they were opened. 



52 City Document No. 96. 

Some had a largo number of coffins, but nothing bad in them, 
There were many people on the sidewalk looking in ; heard none 
of them remark anything about the tombs being olfensive. It was 
quite a warm, muggy day. The desk he usuail}' occupied in the 
registry is at the window opposite Tremont street, looking directly 
out upon this tomb, and if there had been anj'thing otiensive he 
should have noticed it. Know all the people who have come there 
for years examining titles and never heard any one sa}' anything 
about it. (To Mr. Perkins.) Detected no offensive odor. Did not 
look into all of them. Noticed nothing unusual al)out the tomb 
nearest the registry of deeds on Tremont street when it was opened. 
Could not tell by their looks whether the coffins had been there a 
long time or not. Am very quick to detect odors. Some of the 
coffins were much discolored and black. (To Mr. Barry.) Took 
a general look at all of them. Thought they were in admirable 
condition. Was sur[)rised to find them in such a good condition. 

Dr. John IIomans, a physician in practice about seventeen or 
eighteen years, testified in answer to Mr. Clarke's questions, that 
he had been familiar with the King's Chapel Burying-ground in 
that time ; am familiar, by observation, with the condition of cities 
abroad where intramural interments are practised, particularly 
London and Vienna. 

Mr. Clarke stated that it appeared from the City Registrar's 
Record, that in 1M74 five tombs were opened in King's Chapel 
Burying-ground, two for interment, and three for removal ; four 
were opened in 1875, two for interment, and two for removal ; two 
in 1876, one for interment, and one for removal; none in 1877; 
six in 1878, four for interment, and two for removal ; making an 
average of three or four tombs opened in each year, some for in- 
terment and some for removal. 

Dr. IIoiMANs said the etfect of that upon the health of tlie citj' 
in that neighborhood would be inappreciable. There is no better 
disinfectant than earth. 

Mr. Clarke asked Dr. Homans what he thought of the statement 
in the report of the Board of Health as to the value of the King's 
Chapel ground for building and other purposes. 

The Chairman ruled that that had nothing to do with the ques- 
tion before the committee. 

Mr. Clarke desired to put the question as a matter of sanitary 
experience. 

The Chairman thought that was diverting from the subject before 
the committee. 

Mr. Clarke desired to i)ut the question and have the committee 
rule upon it, whether building upon that ground and destroying it 
as a breathing-place would have a greater injury upon public 
health than five to ten interments a year. 

The Chairman decided tliat the question of building on the 
ground was not before the committee. 

Mr. Clarke asked for a vote of the committee upon the ques- 
tion, and the chairman consented. 

Mr. Perkins understood they were simply considering the expe- 
diency of closing the tombs and prohibiting interments. 



Appendix. 53 

Mr. Wyman understood that erecting buildings there had nothing 
to do with the question before the committee. 

Mr. Clarke understood that the Board of Health had recom- 
mended it. 

ISIr. Perkins said there was nothing of the kind in the order. 
They are simply to consider the expediency of closing the tombs 
on sanitary grounds ; but building upon the land had never been 
mentioned. 

Dr. HoMANS, in reply to questions by Mr. Perkins, said the etfect 
of burying-grounds upon the health of people in localities near 
them depended much upon the crowded state of the population. 
At the North End, where there are crowded tenements, it would be 
unhealthy ; but around the St. James Hotel it would not have so 
bad an effect. Had never heard that Park street or its vicinity 
was unhealth3\ (To Mr. Clarke.) Was in the army ; have had 
experience about large burying-grounds where a great number of 
dead have been buried at one time. Never noticed any very par- 
ticular difficult}' arising from troops encamped in the neighborhood, 
if the dead had been properly buried. If the}'^ encamped in the 
neighborhood of a battle-field, the horses and mules might not all 
have been buried, and of course they would make a disa'ireeable 
odor. (To Mr. Perkins.) As a general rule the troops never 
remained long enough in one position to test that question, and 
the battle-field vvas left soon after the battle was fought, but not 
for sanitary reasons. 

Mr. Perkins. — Many troops were buried on the ground of the first 
Bull Run battle, and many froops were encamped around there 
before the second Bull Run. I know it was generally considered 
important to get away from those localities. 

Dr. S. L. Abbott, a physician in practice since 1841, testified 
in answer to questions by Mr, Clarke, that he had had a great many 
patients in the neighborhood of the chapel and Granary Burying- 
grounds and in the Tremont House. Did not consider the Tremout 
House a particularly unhealthy locality on account of its vicinity 
to the burying-ground. Had never seen a case of sickness there 
which could in any way be attributable to the influence of the 
burial-ground. Do not consider that four or five interments a year 
in King's Chapel Burying-ground could injure the public health in 
the slightest degree, if the}- are made decently. Cannot conceive 
of their doing any possible harm. The danger from a great 
amount of organic matter decomposing in crowded communities 
would be usually more from the injury that the drinking-water 
might sustain by filtering through such a soil ; any bad odor from 
the burying-ground might be offensive, and if continued might 
make people sick ; but it would be entirely impossible to prevent 
an3'thing of the kind in the burying-ground. He remembered 
visiiing a burying-ground in Frederick City crowded with dead 
soldiers; but there was not the slightest bad odor about ijt. The 
soldiers were buried in ranks side by side, in long trenches. (To 
Mr. Perkins.) There have been a great variety of diseases that I 
have treated in the vicinit}' of these grounds, but have not had one 
case of fever. They were most of them cases of boarders in the 



54 City Document No. 9G. 

hotel, and occasionally a domestic. The onh' case of zymotic dis- 
ease, which is considered contagions, was two or three years ago, 
in March, I think, by a gentleman who arrived from an extended 
tonr in the West, and was taken with diphtheria almost immedi- 
ately on his arrival. Do not think I have had a case of dysentery 
during the time I have been called there. Tiiat is a class of dis- 
eases likely to be caused by ettiuvia and the disturbance of the 
<ligestive organs. Neither had he heard any complaint from the 
inmates and people emploj'ed in the house of any bad odor from 
the burying-ground. 

Wm. B. Trask, for many ye.ars in the habit of visiting the His- 
torical Society rooms in the Probate building, testified in answer to 
Mr. Clarke, that he had had occasions enough in the past thirty 
years to notice anything noxious or any deleterious odor or nui- 
sance from the graveyard, but had never observed the least thing. 
Had asked the question, whether there was any complaint, and the 
answer had invariably been, not in the least. About twenty years 
ago he was sick with nervous prostration, and on his recovery he 
was particularly sensitive about this sort of thing, and his family 
remarked it. Tlie Registry of Deeds and Probate building is rather 
a pleasant place to work in. (To Mr. Perkins.) Was present in 
tlie oflice looking out of the window when the tombs were opened. 
Detected no odor, not even from the one opened near the Registry 
of Deeds. 

George A. Fisher, member of the Common Council from Ward 
24, in answer to Mr. Clarke, testified that he was present the 
other da}' when the tombs were opened in the chapel ground ; went 
into one of them, called the Johnson tomb. Tliere was no percep- 
tible odor at all. Tlie tomb seemed to be in good condition ; do 
not know what it was opened for ; was in the Registry of Deeds at 
work ; was in the tomb three or four minutes. There were four 
coftins, two on each side ; three of them were whole, apparent!}', 
the fourth was broken. There was no offence at all from the re- 
mains, so far as he could see ; is pretty sensitive to bad odors ; 
liave been at the Registry of Deeds the greater part of the time 
for twelve years ; have not heard the slightest complaint of the 
burying-gi-ound from the people who frequent that place ; think the 
peoi)le who frequent the Registry of Deeds are quite a health}' lot. 
(To Mr. Perkins.) Did not go into the other tombs ; stood close 
to the one by Tremont street ; it was the second tomb opened ; it 
was nearer the Registry than the Johnson toml) ; did not look into 
it ; detected no odor about tlie tombs at the time they were opened. 

Bauson S. Ladd said to Mr. Clarke, that he was present in the 
Chapel-ground when the tombs were opened last Tuesday. Have 
been in the habit of working at the Registry for the last sixteen 
years quite steadily, and also before that. Have noticed no special 
sickness among those who do business there. Conveyancers are 
generally healthy men. The light is poor and the air bad in 
the Registry, but not on account of the tombs. Went into the 
Johnson tomb with IMr. Fisher. Should call it dry and in good 
condition. (To Mr. Perkins.) Never lost a day, except one 
last June. 



Appendix. 55 

Dr. Chadwick, a ph3'sician in active practice about six years, 
said to Mr. Clarke, tliat he was very well acquainted with the 
Chapel Burying-ground. Occasional interments at the rate of two 
to three per annum, such as took place in that ground, would 
have no etfect whatsoever upon the public health. Never noticed 
anything about the burying-ground that was injurious or a nuisance 
in any waj'. (To Mr. Perkins.) Have lived in the neighborhood 
and passed the grounds dail}-. Formerh' resided on Beacon street. 
In selecting a place for a residence he should avoid a graveyard 
he knew nothing about, on sanitary- grounds. Know that many 
eminent physicians have testified in other cities of a prevalence 
of tophus and other diseases near graveyards, but think it depends 
upon whether the drinking-water in the neighborhood would be likely 
to be tainted by tbe surface-water from those grounds. As to 
whether such grounds would be likely to cause such diseases, each 
case would have to be considered separately. Do not think any 
one could express an opinion worth anything in that vague way ; 
at least he could not. Mr. Perkins stated that in the great ma- 
jority of these tombs the bodies were put in, a plank put over 
them and a little earth over that, and the plank soon rots out. He 
asked Dr. Chadwick whether he thought diseases were likely to 
prevail under such circumstances ; and the doctor thouglit they 
would. (To Mr. Clark.) If the tomb was carefull}' cemented with 
brick and stone, and had a slab cemented over it, the escape of ef- 
fluvia could not be appreciably distinguished in that neighborhood. 
(To Mr. Perkins.) If the tombs were in the condition named, and 
were opened from time to time, the escaping efHuvia would con- 
taminate the surrounding air for about twent}' to thirtj' feet for 
about twenty minutes. 

Irving Wixslow appeared as a representative of tombs 17 and 
27. The proprietors of the tombs are satisfied from the evidence 
before the committee that no danger exists to the public health 
from opening them as they have been. Therefore, they feel free 
to plead the cause of sentiment. There is a feeling among the 
proprietors that if their legal rights are taken awa}', the next step 
will be to seize the grounds, remove the bodies, and use the land 
for more profitable purposes. It is unnecessary to touch upon the 
sanitary value of these open breathing-places. The evidence in 
that direction quite overbalances the evidence of the unwhole- 
someness of the ground. There is no practical use likely to be 
made of the tombs. All his farail}' have burial-places at Mt. 
Auburn and other cemeteries, but desire to maintain these grounds 
as monuments to the memor}' of our honored predecessors. 

Mr. Minns read a letter from B. F. Smith, furnishing undertaker, 
251 Tremont street, stating that in his business experience of 
twenty-five years he had never heard any complaint of the tombs 
in King's Chapel Burying-ground. For seventeen years he was 
associated with his father, sexton of King's Chapel Church, and 
was perfectly familiar about the ground. Do not believe tiiere is 
any call for prohibiting tiie use of the tombs for sanitary reasons. 

Mr. Minns read the following : — 

LofC. 



56 City Document No. OH. 

To the Special Committee on Interments : — 

Gkntlemen, — As I cannot conveniontly attend the meeting on the 4th of 
Sei>teinl)er, I beg leave to make a brii'f communication in writing. I do not 
believe tiiat any evil consequences happen from the very rare interments in 
King's Chapel Burial-ground, nor do I think any such use of it is likely to be 
made in tlie future, as to produce illness or inconvenience of any kind. On 
the contrary', I believe it has a positively beneficial influence, as an open 
breathing-space in a crowded part of the city. As one of our too few re- 
maining monuments of the past, I hold it, in conunon with many others, as of 
priceless value to a city which has a history like ours. I have sometimes 
heard ''sentiment" spoken lightly of M'hen it was a question of removing old 
landmarks, and destroying old memorials ; but what would not our friends of 
Chicago, or Cincinnati, give for one such monumental enclosure, with its 
records of two hundred years? I am one of those who have personal reasons 
for being opposed to any movement which there is good reason to believe 
looks to the eventual desecration of our ancient city church-yards, and as 
otfieial estimates have been published of the money value of the ground 
where our forefathers are buried, the next step contemplated can hardly be 
douljtful. My maternal ancestors of two generations, and many of my 
family connections have rested, hitherto, undisturl)ed in the tomb marked No. 
1. in the King's Chapel Cemetery. I say my ancestors, I mean their bodies, 
wliich is all we can cover with our tombstones. And yet not all, for affections 
and remembrances universally held sacred, follow them to wliat we fondly 
suppose is to be their last resting-place, and make its dust holy for those who 
love them. These are sentiments, but they are sentiments which the poor 
savages, whom our ancestors disjjlaced, were human enough to cherish. 
When did a North American Indian ever fail to respect the bones of his 
ancestors? I ask the same respect for those of mine, and that no step may 
be taken which is likely to lead to their ejection. 

I am, gentlemen, yours very respectfully, 

OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES. 

Sept. ],]8:9. 

]Mv. MtNNS read the following: — 

Newport, R.I., August 28, 1879. 
Mt Dear Sir, — I regret to be informed that the authorities of Boston con- 
template the taking of measures to prevent future interments in the Stone 
Chapel Burying-ground. As the oldest living member of my family, I protest 
against such proposed action. Among some old papers in my possession, is 
one of which the following is a copy : — 

" At a meeting of the vSelectmen of the Town of Boston, the 2fith of 
October, 171!), lil)erty granted to Wm. Hutchinson, and Mr. Francis Brinley, 
to make a tomb in the old burying-place, on the same spot where Mr. Francis 
Brinley's relatives were formerly buried, for the interring of the seigneur of 
the family there. 

A true copy is entered in the records of the Town of Boston. 

E.xamined, P. R. Josei-ii Trout Town Clerk." 

This "seigneur" referred to was Francis Brinley, who came to America 
from England; married and lived in Newport. His name and standing are 
well known to all who are acquainted with the colonial history of Kliode 
Island. He had estates in Boston, which he fre(|uently visiteil. He died 
there at an advanced age, having survived his children ; but there were two 
grandchildren, both of them born in England. They and their widowed 
mother came to America by his invitation. One of these grandcliildren was 
a daughter, who married Wm. Hutchinson; the other was a son, Col. Francis 
Brinley, of Datchct House, Roxbury, ISIass. They wore the persons to whom 
liberty was given "to make a tomb." In it repose the remains of my great- 
great grandfather ; of my great grandfather and great grandmother ; of my grand- 
father and grandmother; of my father and mother, and of a sister; there I 
wish them to remain. I respectfully insist that there must be an overwhelming 



Appendix. 57 

indisputable necessity to justify a nullification of the vote of the selectmen, 
to which I have adverted ; and I also insist that no proof of such necessity 
exists. To prevent interments in the Stone Chapel Burying-ground, cannot 
be from mere sanitary consideration ; hence, a vote of the proprietors should 
be had before the city can be justified in undertaking a measure which will 
tend to depreciate a most valuable property, as is this God's acre, for the 
benefit of anybody but those whose feelings and interests are profoundly con- 
cerned. As I cannot be in Boston at the proposed hearing on the 4th prox., 
you are at liberty to use this as you shall deem proper and expedient. 
Very respectfully your obedient servant, 

FRANCIS BRINLEY. 

Thomas Mikns, Esq., 14 Louisburg Sq., Boston, Mass. 

Mr. Minns also read letters from A. J. C. Sowden, and George 
"W. Wales, protesting against the closing of the tombs. 

The Chairman stated that there seemed to be a misunderstand- 
ing on the part of some of the remonstrants as to tlie duty of the 
committee, and at his request Dr. Durgin, on behalf of the Board 
of Health, stated that the}' had presented the communication to 
the City Government, simpl}' from a sanitar}' point of view. It is 
not intended to disturb the open spaces or encourage the building 
of anything upon them ; on the contrarv, he should certainl}' pro- 
test against any building being erected on those sites ; and said 
the feeling of the Board of Health was that the ground should be 
closed against further interments, and the tombs sealed up and 
made secure, and the beauty of the place preserved as far as pos- 
sible, by the city of Boston. It is not the feeling of the Board of 
Health that the bodies should be removed from the tombs, unless 
it be the desire of the proprietors to do so at their pleasure. 

Mr. Clarke called Dr. Durgin's attention to the valuation of 
the ground, made in the report of the Board of Health of 1877, 
and the doctor denied that it was intended as a recommendation 
for the building of a court-house upon the site. The Board had 
tried in all honorable ways to stir up the City Council and people 
of Boston, and make them feel that the time had come when no 
more bodies should be placed there. The Board do not recom- 
mend the sale of the grounds. He should protest against their 
sale and against any building being placed upon those grounds. 
The present Board would not be willing to see an}' building placed 
thereon. He should prefer to have the remains removed, but the 
Board do not ask for that. If the tombs can be sealed and remain 
closed, he should ask for nothing more ; but if they are left open 
and dilapidated, the Board would protest against it, and continue 
to do so. In reply to questions by Mr. Clarke, Dr. Durgin said 
he was not present when the tombs were opened, but it was done 
by i)ermission of the Board of Health to show their condition to 
the committee. If anything had been improperly disturbed, he 
should be veiy sorry. He had no sickl}' sentiment about this 
matter, but he had as much feeling of respect for the grounds as 
an}- one else, and would do as much towards their beauty and pro- 
tection as any one else. 

Mr. Minns called Francis Parkman, one of the trustees of the 
Athenaeum, who said there had been no complaint made by the 



58 City Document No. 96. 

proprietors of the Atheiuvuin about the i)roxiinity of the Granary 
Burial-ground during tlie twent^'-one years lie had been trustee. 
He believed the trustees and tlie proprietors both regarded the 
presence of the grave3'ard as a positive advantage in supplying 
light and air. That is one of the advantages usually spoken of 
in regard to the situation of the Athenaeum. 

Mr. Clarke, on behalf of the proprietoi's of the tombs fronting on 
Tremont street, said they were all built in 1738, by a special permit 
granted at a town meeting, under certain conditions which have 
been complied with. Mr. Clarke read extracts from the records 
of the town to corroborate this statement, and also further extracts 
giving the history of the tombs, the repairs made u[)on them by 
the proprietors, and the action of the town in relation thereto, 
all showing that the original conditions had been fully complied 
with b}' the proprietors. lie said there were too few breathing- 
places in the city already. The proprietors were afraid that, if the 
tombs were closed, the next step would be to remove the remains 
and confiscate the property for private gain or public use. He did 
not supi)ose there was one of the proprietors living who did not 
feel the highest disgust and indignation at the proposal that the 
rights wliich his ancestors had purchased and paid for should be 
forfeited, when nothing whatever has been shown as regards au}- 
particular tomb that is a nuisance. Point to a syllable of evi- 
dence that authorizes the closing of one of the tombs on the ground 
that it is a nuisance. It' you cannot do that, then when we come 
to our appeal to the Supreme Court, which we are authorized to 
make, that is the issue the city have got to try before a jury. Has 
anything been shown that tomb No. 15 is a nuisance? It had not 
been opened since he was born. It has beei: sealed up with a stone 
slab laid in cement since before he was boi-ii, and the proposition 
is to deprive him of a rigiit in it, — whether or not he proposed to 
use it is nobody's business. The proprietors want that place kept 
open as a shrine. They know that the report of the Board of 
Health, coupled with the statement of the pecuniary value of the 
land, will tend to the creation of a sentiment in favor of using 
tliis lanil for building purposes. The remains of John Leverett 
and John Winthrop lie there. Those are names we ought to honor, 
and in behalf of the memories and associations clustered about 
such names the proprietors protest against this first attempt to 
encroach upon the rights of the people who own the tombs in 
King's Chapel Burying-ground. Not a single case of nuisance had 
been proved before the committee. We have a histor}- in these 
little spots, and Boston cannot alford to have them tampered with. 
Boston cannot alford to lose them. Faneuil Hall is not very con- 
venient for a town-house or for public meetings of citizens, but 
does anybody want to sell it? Does anybody want to close it and 
seal it up? So we say to you, leave us this right. It has not 
been exercised within five years enough to cause any harm. Above 
all, whatever you do, do not la}- the foundation for any use of 
those grounds which will not leave them open to God's light and 
air for the lionefit of this neighborhood forever. We stand 
here to defend the ri<>;hts of the citizens of Boston to have 



Appendix. 59 

that breathing-space, and to defend it against the insinuation 
of the Board of Health in 1877 that it can be sold. The Board 
of Health say they did not recommend it and do not believe it 
should be sold, C3h, no ; the}' didn't recommend it ; but the}' said 
if it could be sold, a piece of land could be bought somewhere else 
with the money. We have got them on record finalh' that it ought 
not to be done ; but they say that sooner or later the remains must 
be removed. He stood here to prevent the desecration of those 
graves under the orders of the Board Health. Tliey are here to 
resist this first step which the city has no right to take unless each 
and ever}' tomb is shown to be a nuisance and injurious to public 
health. That is what must be proved to a jury on appeal. 

In the course of his remarks, Mr. Clarke dwelt upon the fact, as 
appeared from the records, that the city tomb known as the 
Charnel Tomb had been in bad condition, and he strongly con- 
trasted the neglect of the city authorities with the care which the 
private ownei-s had exercised over their property. 

AiiTHUR T. Lyman, representing the proprietors of the King's 
Chapel Church, said the societ}' are entirely opposed to such a use 
of this burial-ground as would tend to allow it to be built upon, and 
they are opposed to further interments there. The vestry of the 
church last spring unanimously expressed the wish of the congre- 
gation that interments should be prevented. Nearl}' every one 
having an interest in the tombs has a place of interment provided 
elsewhere. The church has spent a good deal of money in keeping 
the tombs in perfect order. Although no nuisance has occurred 
under the chapel as j'et, it is simply because the church looks 
after the tombs. If an}' neglect occurs they are liable to become a 
nuisance. A large number of the tombs near the chapel have been 
.opened a good deal of the time last spring and winter. A year or 
two ago, in the winter or spring, when the frost was in the ground, 
a burial took place in the north part of the chapel. It was filled 
in when the ground was frosty ; a heavy rain washed it away, and 
the surface water poured freely into the tomb. Such things are apt 
to occur in the burying-ground where there are no individuals con- 
stantly attending the tombs, and no public body to look after them. 
Such a case is sutBcient to constitute a-«isjisance. In London fur- 
ther burials have been prohibited in many of the city cemeteries. 
In many cases the tombstones have been removed, and the bury- 
ing-grouuds turned into public gardens. 

George E. Lincoln, representing tomb No. 7, said the proprie- 
tors very seriously object to any steps being tal^en to close the 
tombs, and he thoroughly indorsed the remarks of Mr. Clarke. 

E. H. Derby stated that in 1819 he came to reside in the vicinity 
of those burial-grounds at No. 1 Park street, next to the church, 
and lived there eight years, part of the time attending the Latin 
School and part of the time at Harvard College. It was always a 
healthful spot. The health of the family was excellent, and he 
remembered no fever or disease of that character during the time he 
resided there. He appeared for two tombs — No. 16, that belonged 
to his maternal ancestor, Enoch Brown, a prominent merchant of 
Boston before and during the Revolutionary War ; the other tomb 



60 CiTT Document No. 96. 

was the resting-place of John Arnold, a prominent man in his time, 
having command of the militia during the war with England. Mr. 
Derby spoke at length of the rights of the proprietors, the respect 
whicli should be shown to the memory of those who were buried in 
the tomb, and said that from the evidence he could see no adequate 
reason for closing the tomb. If he could be assured that no build- 
ing would be placed upon the ground in the future, he would be 
inclined to acquiesce in the closing of the tombs ; but he was very 
fearful he couhl not get an assurance on that subject. He thought 
it best to stand on the title which the}- held. 

Mr. Derby filed the following with the committee : — 

To the Hon. the City Council of Boston : — 

The undersigned, E. Hasket Derby, respectfully states that he has been for 
many years the sole owner of tomb No. IG, near the centre of King's Chapel 
Burying-ground. with rights in the land adjacent. That it contains the dust of 
his maternal ancestors ; that he has repaired the same from respect for the 
honored dead. Tliat there have been no interments in it for nearly half a cen- 
tury ; that he wishes to keep it inviolate and in proper repair. He therefore 
respectfully protests against any action of the city government that shall im- 
pair the value of his estate in said tomb and land. 

ELIAS HASKET DERBY. 

Abigail C. Lloyd, representing tomb No. 26, said it had 
always been taken care of, and was in good condition. She is tlie 
only one remaining of her mother's family, and would like to be 
laid there. The last interment was about a year ago last August. 
There are four more likely to be buried there. She would prefer to 
be buried there rather than accept another place offered by the city. 

Henry E. Holland said his mother is buried in a tomb marked and 
belonging to Mr. Martin Smith. He had also four infants buried 
there, and his father and great grandfather were buried there. He did 
not want to have their remains disturbed, though if the city would 
give a good lot and remove the remains there he would not object. 

Mary A. Nims spoke in regard to the AVm. Moore tomb, and 
said she had a brother who wished to be buried there. The tomb 
was used about three years ago. She would prefer that the tomb 
remain as it is. 

O. L. Fkrn, rei)resenting tomb No. 24, said there were many 
people who are likel}' to be buried there. He had not so much ob- 
jection to the closing of the tomb as other members of the family 
had, if a suitable place is provided at the expense of the city. He 
would prefer to have the tomb remain as it is on the whole. If the 
city provided a place acceptable to him he would not object. 

This closed the public hearing. 

Dr. DuRGiN explained to the committee that the paragraph so 
often quoted fi-om the Board of Health of 1877, in regard to the 
valuation of the land, was never intended as a recommendation 
that the land be sold or built upon. The Board had been endeav- 
oring to attract the attention of the City Council to this subject, 
and this was one of the means used to accomplish that end. The 
Board had never contemplated selling or building upon the burial- 
ground. 



Appendix. 61 



A ACT TO Amend Chapter Twenty-Eight of the General 
Statutes in Respect to Closing Tombs in Cities. 

Be it enacted, etc., as follows: — 

Section 1. The Citj- Council of any cit}- may, upon report of 
the Board of Health thereof that the public health requires it, and 
after public notice and hearing in the manner hereinafter provided, 
forbid future interment in any tomb or tombs within the city 
limits. 

Section. 2. The report of the Board of Health above mentioned 
shall specif}' the tomb or tombs to which its action refers, and 
name the owner or owners thereof if the same be known ; and 
thereupon the city clerk shall give notice to such owner or 
owners as are known and reside within the Commonwealth, and 
shall likewise publish a notice at least twice a week for four 
consecutive weeks, in two or more newspapers published in 
the city, or in the county wherein said city is situated. The 
said notice shall recite the report of said Board of Health, and 
shall notify all parties interested in the premises to appear before 
a Joint Committee of the City Council, at a time not less than two 
nor more than three months from last publication of said notice, 
and show cause why the report of said Board of Health should not 
be accepted, and the tomb or tombs therein mentioned be closed. 
After such hearing, the Cit}- Council ma}-, upon a A-ote of both 
branches thereof, and with the approval of the Mayor, declare said 
tomb or tombs to be closed, and no interments shall thereafter be 
permitted therein. 

Section 3. Whenever in the judgment of the Board of Health 
of an}' city an}' tomb therein needs repair, it shall give notice 
tiiereof to the known owner, or if there be more than one, to one 
of the known owners thereof, requiring that said tomb be put in a 
proper state of repair within three months from the date thereof; 
and if the owner or owners of said tomb be unknown, then the 
Board of Health may publish notice in the manner provided in 
section two, requiring the owner or owners to repair said tomb 
within the time above mentioned ; and if the owner or owners do 
not repair said tomb within the time mentioned, then the Board of 
Health may enter upon said tomb and make the repairs needed, at 
the expense of said city. If the public health requires immediate 
action, the Board of Health may make the necessary repairs, the 
cost of which shall be refunded upon demand, by the owner or 
owners of such tomb. If the city shall incur any expense in re- 
gard to any tomb, in the manner before specified, the said tomb 
shall be held by said Board of Health, and no further use shall be 
made of said tomb until the owner or owners thereof shall pay the 
expense of said repairs and interest thereon ; and after twenty 
years' possession under this act for non-repairs, all interest and 
right of burial in any such tomb shall vest in the city in which the 
same is situate. 



62 City Document No. 96. 

Section 4. The provisions of section three of chapter twenty- 
eight of the General Statutes shall apply to all tombs in public 
cemeteries in cities, and the boards of health in cities shall exer- 
cise, in regard to such tombs, the powers granted by said section 
to trustees or directors of certain corporations. 

Section 5. Any person aggrieved by the action of the Cit}' 
Council or Board of Health under this act, may appeal therefrom 
in the manner provided by sections nine and ten of chapter twent}'- 
eight of the General Statutes. 

Section 6. The provisions of section eighty-nine of chapter 
forty-three of the General Statutes shall apply to the erection of 
any building upon an}- burial-ground or cemetery belonging to any 
cit}' in the Commonwealth. 

Section 7. This act shall take effect upon its passage. 

Appr-oved May 4, 1877. 



[Document 110 — 1879.] 



CITY OF mz,.,.S BOSTON. 




COMMUN IC ATIONS 



RKLATING TO 



INTRAMURAL INTERMENTS. 



In Common Council, November 6, 1879. 

The Joint Special Committee on Intramural Interments 
beg leave to submit herewith several communications relat- 
ing to the closing of the Granary and King's Chapel Buryiug- 
grounds. 

As these communications have a special bearing ui)on the 
right of the City Council to close the ground under the 
present statute, and the extent to which the city would be 
liable in case of an adverse decision upon an appeal to a 
jury, the committee deem it proper that they should be pre- 
sented, for the information of the City Council. 
Respectfully submitted , 

JOSEPH A. TUCKER, 
JOSIAH S. ROBINSON, 
GEORGE T. PERKINS, 
JAMES J. BARRY, 
GEORGE H. WYMAN. 



Opinion of Hon. James M. Keitli. 

Boston, Oct. 21, 1871*. . 
W. H. Whitmoke, Esq. : — 

Dear Sir, — I have your note of the 17th inst., in which 
you say that "in the debate on the matter of closing tombs. 



2 City Document No. 110. 

all Iho opponents took this ground, — first, thnt the General 
Statutes, Chai). 28, Sect. 10, says that if the jury find that 
the tomb was not a nuisance, the order must be rescinded ; 
second, that your Board states these tombs not to be a 
nuisance ;" and you ask my oj^inion and that of the Board in 
relation to the law and facts touching- the su1)ject-matter. 

I may say, in the outset, that the J^oard has not made any 
such statement as that embodied in the second head above 
quoted : and hoAV anyone could have drawn any such inference 
from the testimony of members of the Board, imperfectly 
reported on pages 43, 44, and 4 6 of the appendix to the com- 
mittee's rei)ort, is beyond my couprehension. There ap- 
pears to have been a total misapi)iehension Jioth of the law 
and facts under which the Board acted in its reconmicnda- 
tion that these tombs be closed to future interment. 

The action of the Boai'd nas under Sects. 1 and 2 of Chap. 
182 of the Acts of 1877, and not under Chap. 28 of the 
General Statutes. The i,ssue raised, therefore, and the one 
to be tried, is the one raised by the statute of 1877, and not 
the one specifically described in the General Statutes. 

This new statute, as it appears to me, materially changed 
the law sovernino: the closina" of tombs to future burials. 

It does not contemplate tiiat the Board shall wait uutu a 
pestilence shall have arisen from the accumulated mass of 
human putrefaction buried in our midst; but contemplates 
the action of the Board whenever it pi'rceives that burials 
have gone to that extent that the furtlier continuance of them 
will necessarily be prejudicial to the public health. In other 
words, its object was to prevent the use of tombs in a manner 
prejudicial to the public health. Under this statute the 
Board of Health reports, in its judgment, the public health 
requires that future interments in these tombs should be 
prohibited. The notice given to the owners is, to show 
cause why the report of the Board of Health should not be 
accepted and the tombs closed. 

The action of the City Council will necessarily be to accept 
or reject the report of the l)0:ird of Health : and, in case of its 
acceptance, to order the tombs closed. The fifth section of 
the law gives the i)art3' aggrieved l)y the action of the Board 
or Council the right of appeal in the manner provided by 
Sections 9 and 10 of Cha[)ter 23 of the General Statutes. 
That is, the aggrieved party has six months in which to claim 
his ai)peal, and upon giving the notices lequired has a right 
of trial by jury. But to tiy what? AVhy, clearly to try the 
issue raised under the act of 1877, to wit, the adjudication of 
the Board, that "the public health requires that future inter- 
ments in these tombs shall be prohibited." 



Intramural Interments. 3 

Now, was that adjudication correct, and should it be ap- 
prov^ed or rejected ? 

That is the question in issue for discussion. It is a well- 
known fact, that as early as 1795, when Boston had a popu- 
lation of less than twenty thousand, the selectmen of the 
town, acting as a Board of Health, prohibited, as a health 
measure, further burials in graves in these two burial- 
grounds. Burials in the tombs have continued to the 
present time. The very able and exhaustive citation of 
authorities as to the effect of intramural burials, embraced 
in the report of the joint committee on that subject, renders 
it wholly unnecessary for me to pursue farther that inquiry. 
They sliow conclusively that tlie decomposition of human 
bodies sets free most active poisonous gases and effluvia, 
highly detrimental to the public health. 

Sanitarians agree in the declaration that burials in the 
ground are fiir less injurious than in tombs; because the 
earth, if not already saturated, will absorb the gases evolved 
in decomposition, while the cracks and crevices of the tombs 
afford a free escape into the atmosphere. The dilapidated 
condition of many of the tombs in question is a inatter of 
common notoriety, and has been a subject of complaint for 
years. But it is said some of them are in fair and some in good 
condition, and that the owners are ready to keep them so. 
What of it? Does it foiU)w that these tombs should continue 
to be used as places of interment? By no means. 

First. Because the grounds in which they are placed, and 
the earth hy which they are partly covered, are already com- 
pletely permeated and saturated with the gases generated by 
decomposition, until the earth can absorb no more. It is a 
law of physics that two bodies cannot occupy the same place 
at the same time. Whi^n, therefore, a body is placed in one 
of these tombs, as the aii-, bodies, and coffins already placed 
there fill the interior of the tomb, the gases evolved in the 
putref\iction of this new body must of necessit}^ escape into 
and contaminate the surrounding atmosphere. It is this use 
of the tombs, and not the tombs themselves, that is prejudi- 
cial to the public health. 

A tomb that has not been used for fifty years for burial 
purposes ma}' not be of itself prejudicial to the public 
health, but opening it and its use for such purpose; would 
make it so ; and it is that use in the future which is sought 
to be guarded against. 

Second. These tombs should not be used for burial pur- 
poses because they are in the midst of a dense population, 
which nnist breathe the air thus vitiated by them, and be 
iiijui'ed more or Ifss. in proportion to the constancy and 



4 City Document No. 110. 

amount of such inhalation. One of these grounds, as you 
know, is ))ounded on three sides by dwellinir-houses, some 
of which are in actual contact with the toml)s, and all are 
within a few feet of them. The other ground is bounded on 
two sides by the Probate Court, the Registry of Deeds, and 
the City Hall, all of which buildings are constantly occupied 
by the city ofticials during the day, and are resorted to by 
throngs of people having business to transact there. 

It is hard to conceive, therefore, of a more unsuitable 
place for burial than these grounds, or one where the conse- 
quences of such burials would be more detrimental to the 
public health. 

But it is said man}- ]){'0})le testitied that they had not per- 
ceived the escape of any deleterious gases from these tombs, 
nor felt any injurious effects arising from their present use. 
What of it? 

So, too, scores of families discover no sewer gases in 
their houses, and are oliended at even the suggestion that 
their houses are in a non-sanitary condition, until perhaps 
scarlet fever or diphtheria carries aw^ay a loved child, when 
their physician points to their defective drainage as the sure 
cause of their bereavement. 

But if there are many who are not conscious of having 
suffered from the injurious gases issuing from these tombs, 
there are others Avho are conscious of having suffered from 
them often and acutely. The Board did not need to call 
witnesses from a distance to theorize or testify on this sub- 
ject ; it was surrounded with living examples of the effects 
of the emanations from these tombs. For three years it had 
occupied, against its oft-repeated remonstrance, an office in 
the City Ilall, below the level of the surface of the adjoining 
burial-ground, and within a few feet of these toml)s, the sick- 
ening odors from which tilled its rooms. Every member of 
the Board, and many of its employes, as well as others 
under their observation, had been made sick by these gases. 
The foul smell produced by them was a common subject of 
remark and complaint by those visiting the office on business. 
The Board would liavo deemed it a cruelty to have permitted 
a poor family to have occupied such a place as a tenement, 
and would have ordered such a family to vacate it forthwith. 
When therefore the Board adjudicated that the public health 
required that these tombs should be closed to further l)urials, 
it did not act merely upon the theory that all such burials in 
populous places must be, according to all sanitary laws and 
experiences, prejudicial to the public health, but it had 
actual knowledge that such burials then were prejudicial to 
the public healtli ; and, as like causes produce like results, 



Intraiviural, Interments. 5 

they could not fail to be prejudicial to the public health in 
the future. 

I have already spoken of the unsuitable location of these 
tombs as places of burial. One would certainly expect that 
the city would demand that the atmosphere around its City 
Hall, erected at so great a cost, should be free from poison- 
ous gases and the effluvia of putrefaction ; that its officials 
should be able to occupy the offices in it without danger to 
their lives or health. Would not the Board, with the ex- 
perience just recited, have been derelict in the discharge of 
its duty had it failed to recommend the closiug of these 
tombs to further burials? 

Objection has been made to the adoption of the recom- 
mendation of the Board, to close these tombs to further 
burials, on account of the eminent fame of those whose re- 
mains repose in them ; and it has been asserted or insinuated 
that a desecration of their resting-place was contemplated. 

Nothing could have been suggested farther from the 
thoughts or purposes of this Board. It fails to see how a 
discontinuance of burials there, accompanied by a careful 
preservation of existing monuments, the cultivation of tlowers 
and a constant supervision of the grounds, can be deemed a 
desecration. The action of the Board has been purely upon 
sanitary grounds, and for the protection of the public health. 
In guarding this, it could not be influenced by the considera- 
tion of the station in life of those whose remains lie in these 
tombs. The physical laws of decay act upon all alike without 
regard to station, sex, or condition. Dives in decomposition 
is no sweeter than Lazarus, and the one is as prejudicial to 
the public health as the other. 

I have thus given, as well as I could in the time at my 
command, a brief statement of the views of the Board 
both as to the law and facts touching the subject-matter 
inquired of. 

Trusting that the action of the City Council in relation to 
these tombs will be as sagacious as that of the Government 
of 1795, before referred to, 

I remain. 

Very truly yours, 

JAMES M. KEITH. 



6 City Document No. 110. 

Opinion of Hon. John P. Healy. 

City Solicitor's Office, 
2 Pemberton Square, Boston, Oct. 23, 1879. 

Messrs. G. T. Perkins and J. J. Barry : — 

Gen'jlemen, — In reply to 3'oiir coinmuniciitioii I have to 
say that, in ray oi)ini()n, on appeal by a tomb-owner from an 
order of the City Council that his tomb be closed, th(; 9th 
and 10th Sections of the 28th Chapter of the General Stat- 
utes are applicable, and that the trial of the appeal must be 
in accordance with their provisions. The 10th section pro- 
vides, that if the jury iind that the tomb was not a nuisance, 
nor injurious to the public health, at the time of the order, 
the ccnirt shall rescind the order, etc. The issue to be tried 
by the jury nmst be this question. 

Yours, very respectfully, 

J. P. HEALY. 



Opinion of ITou. Clement Hugh Hill. 

Boston, Oct. 30, 1879. 

i\lY DEAR Sir : — I am perfectly willino; to say to you in 
writing what I told you orally the other day, about my con- 
struction of the statute of 1877 providing for closing tombs 
in cities : although the man who drafts a statute is prover- 
bially a bad authority as to its meaning, and although I speak 
M'ith some hesitation when I learn that veiy distinguished 
counsel hold a dillerent opinion. 

A draft of a bill on this subject was submitted to the 
Judiciary Committee of the House in 1877, which, not being 
satisfactory, was laid aside;, and I drafted and submitted to 
the connuittce the i)resent statute, including Section 5, giving 
an appeal to a jury. In giving this right, our intention, 
according to the best of my recollection, was not to change 
the issue, but merely to give a right of appeal to a jury 
upon the same question as that on wliich the Board of Health 
and City Council, as provided in Siction 1, had passed, 
namely, whether the public health required that future in- 
terments should be forbidden in any tomb or tombs within 
the city limits; .-ind the provision of Sections, that any 
person aggrieved ))}' the action of the city, under this act, 
''may api)eal therefrom in the manner provided by Sections 
9 and 10 of Chapter 28 of the General Statutes," merely 



Intramural. Interments. 7 

indicjitcs the rannner of appeal, and in no wise changes the 
issue. Otherwise, it seems to me, any person may com- 
pletely nullify the action of the City Council by simply ap- 
pealing: from it ; for although the action of the Board of 
Health and City Council may have been perfectly proper 
and wise, and the ])ul>lic health requiie that future inter- 
ments in any tomb should be forbidden, nevertheless, the 
owner by a})pealing may prevent the closing of the tomb, 
not by showing that the Board of Health and City Council 
decided erroneously in their adjudication, but by showing 
that the tomb "was not a nuisance nor injurious to the public 
health at the time of the order," — a fact perfectly consistent 
with the decision appealed from. 

It is apparent, for example, that tombs under a church 
may be innocuous in their existing state, and yet the public 
health may loudly demand that interments in them should 
cease ; and it was our purpose to provide a means of so 
doing. 

This was certainly my intention, and, I believe, the inten- 
tion of the committee . 

Whether it is a proper construction of the statute is. I am 
aware, another question. But construing as we ought Sec- 
tion 1 of the Statutes of 1877 and Section 10 of Chaj)t('r 2<S 
of the General Statutes together, their legal effect, in my 
judgment, is to add a new issue for a jury for cases arising 
under this statute, namely, whether the public health re- 
quires that future interments in any tomb should be forbid- 
den. Thus construed the two statutes are entirely consistent. 

Very faithfully yours, 

C. H. HILL. 



Opinion of Robert I). Smith, Esq. 

Boston, Oct. 28, 1879. 

Wm. H. Wiiitmore, Esq. : — 

Dear Sir, — I have considered Chapter 182 of Acts of 
1877, and am of the opinion that the appeal provided in Sec- 
tion 5 is to be tried in the "manner" prescribed in General 
Statutes, Chapter 28, Section 10, but that the issue to be tried 
is the one raised by the later act. This issue is whether or not 
the "public health requires" the prohibition of future inter- 
ments in the tomb owned by the appellant, or in any 
cemetery. 

The clause in the General Statutes, Chapter 28, Section 10, 



8 City Document No. 110. 

provides for the trial of an api)eal, and "if the jury find that 
the tomb, hurial-irround, or cemetery so closed was not a 
nuisance nor injurious to puhlic liealth at the time of the order, 
the Court shall rescind the order," etc. The latter clause, 
"nor injurious to public health," is not equivalent to the 
former clause, "not a nuisance;" l)ut if the question under 
the later act was simpl}^ whether the tomb were a nuisance 
or injurious to public health at the time of passing the order, 
Section 1 of the Statutes of 1S77 would be without force, 
and couhl confer no power to proliibit future interments 
because required by public licahh. 

1 think that the jury nnist pass on the question I'alsed by 
the new hiw, and not on the question of a technical nuisance, 
nor wheth(M* the tomb is injtu'ious to public health at the 
time of order ; and of course the new issue is much broader 
than the former one would be. I presume a jury would not 
be ready to ditfer from the views of a Hoard of Health on 
what was prejudicial to public health. 

Respectfully, 

R. D. SMITH. 



Exti'act from General Statutes. 

The followinn- is the section of General Statutes, Chapter 
43, Section ^^9, referred to in the sixth section of the Act of 
1877, in regard to prohibiting future interments in tombs : — 

"No highway or town-way shall be laid out or constructed 
in, upon, or through, an enclosure used or appropriated for 
the burial of the dead, unless anthority to that effect is 
specially granted by law, or the consent of the inhabitants 
of the town where such enclosure is situated is first ob- 
tained." 



Opinion of Hon. Jolin P. Tlealy. 

City SoLicnoR's Office, 
2 Pemhekton Squake, Boston, Oct. 22, 1879. 

William H. Wiiitmore, Esq. : — 

Dear Sii;, — 1 cannot answer with definiteness your 
(pieslion as to the ])iobal)le amount of costs that would be 
recovered against the city in case a tomb should be ordered 



Intramural Interments. 9 

to be closed under the authority given in the General Stat- 
utes, Chap. 28, and the owner should appeal from the order 
as provided in the same chapter, :ind the order should be 
rescinded. The case on the appeal might be finally deter- 
mined in the Superior Court, or questions of law might be 
reserved for the Supreme (.ourt, and the amount of costs 
would be affected l)y the determination of this fact. The 
amount would also be affected by the number of witnesses 
used, and the number of days they should be detained in 
court. Exclusive of the fees of witnesses, the probability is 
that the costs would not exceed fiity dollars in one case. 
Each witness would be entitled to one dollar and fifty cents 
for each day's attendance. 

I am, very respectfully. 

Your obedient servaut, 

J. P. HEALY. 



NOV 25 1502 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



012 608 596 5 ft 



